A Just and Loving God?

[hurst]

rossum:

As I said, even the Argentine Colonels allowed pregnant women to give birth before killing them. Are the Argentine Colonels better than God?

This is a bad comparison. God made those babies to begin with. And whether those Colonels are doing something good or not depends on whether they are doing God’s Will. For example, in the OT, Saul was supposed to destroy certain enemy cities and kill every man, woman, child, and animal therein. When he spared some, he was punished for disobeying God. So, if the Colonels were directed by God to kill women and children, then they did not do something good by sparing the children. However, they are obviously not part of a Theocracy under the direct command of God, so it would not apply to their case. Perhaps they should not have been killing the women, either. I don’t know the situation.

What determines whether something is good or not is whether God wills it or not. For only He knows all things, and does what pleases Him unto eternity.

hurst

 

[hurst]

rossum:

As described in Genesis the flood was directly caused by God’s power. God had many possible ways to punish the wicked.

Using the weather is one way God shows that He is Lord of Creation. As such, people had the opportunity of attributing it to God more readily (as you indeed do), and deciding whether to accept it as just punishment of their sins or to reject it as another reason to curse God. That innocent children died along with them is an unfortunate side-effect. It is not much different with Adam’s sin causing all future generations to be born with the effects of that Original Sin.

God isn’t just a policeman. He is the Creator, and made us to show forth His Power and Glory. Anything He does with us that is according to His eternal purpose are a great privilege for us, whether we be a king or peasant.

rossum:

What I am questioning is His decision to use a flood that killed unborn children rather than a different method of punishment which would have allowed the unborn children to survive.

You seem to ignore the gratitude owed to Him for creating those children in the first place. He has every right to dispose of His creation as He pleases, for everything is in His power. If something is not fair, I assure you that He will tend to it a lot sooner than you. The very fact that you have concern about innocent babies should make you realize that God cares, for He is the one inspiring you. What I suspect you see in the mirror when you look toward God, is yourself. Could it be that the injustice you are attributing to God is actually your own? For when we look to God, it is like looking in a mirror. To the just He seems just, and to the wicked He seems wicked.

But perhaps He gives you a concern for these innocents because you do not have that concern yourself. Perhaps He is calling you to stand up for the lives of those being aborted in these days. If you don’t, then your condemnation of God regarding the innocents will fall on your own head. I hope I can at least look forward to your assistance in stopping abortion in our country and the world.

hurst

 

[PraRFLEsEkHm]

Thal59:

All of this presupposes that the story of Noah should be taken literally. The interesting part is that, while virtually every biblical story has some sceintific evidence to support it, there is no scientific evidence to support a global flood. Evidence of a global flood would be present in the geological record everywhere in the world.

I personally do not accept the story of the flood on a literal basis. It would be impossible for Noah to build an ark that could house the many millions of animal types that would need to be present there. The expressions in Genesis referring to the “world” or the whole earth being flooded means that part of the world where the salvation story is concerned. (Translations of the words for world or earth can also mean “the land,” therefore, the flood covered the land; meaning only that specific area of the world.)

It would be like someone who survives a volcanic eruption writting… “Anyone there would tell you the whole world was perishing!”

Or what about the rainbow God had set in the sky? The text makes it sound as if this is the first time a rainbow occured and that it required an act of God to make it happen. Rainbows are the product of airborne water particles and light. If a rainbow required an act of God to be produced for the first time after the flood, then one gets into a sticky argument over whether God quantitatively changed the molecular structure of water, or the atomic structure of light.

One cannot discern the love or justice of God from a literal reading of the story of Noah.

Thal59

What has helped me through some of these issues can be found here

The main site is This One

Peace

John

 

[hurst]

PraRFLEsEkHm:

What has helped me through some of these issues can be found here

That was an interesting article of someone trying to reconcile the Truth in scripture with perspectives from those in the scientific community.

But I think he makes the mistake of giving too much credence to the various reports of scientists. We should never place our faith in science, because by its own admission, science is a discipline that is constantly changing its conclusions, analyses, and “beliefs”. Its value is limited to what it can empirically accomplish in the present. Things in the ancient past like creation and the flood are not repeatable in the lab, and thus do not even directly lend themselves to the “scientific method”. Perhaps calling untestable studies scientific is a misnomer. In fact, those particular events were huge miracles. If science can’t explain current miracles where shriveled stumps regrow into fully operational legs within moments, why be bothered about “reconciling” other miracles to science (or rather, untestable theoretical studies).

Every one of those issues that were brought up that he considered serious are nothing compared to the fact that those scientists refuse to have faith in God. So the only way they will “listen” is if you come up with a plausible natural explanation. But by then they will remain unbelieving because you just agreed with them that it was all natural anyway. We are called to be the salt of the earth, to make it feel our presence and preserve it from corruption. If the salt loses its saltiness, it is good for nothing but to be cast on the ground and trampled underfoot.

We must always keep in mind that scripture doesn’t change, but science does. Scripture doesn’t change because what we believe in Scripture we believe by virtue of it being from God. We may not understand it properly, but there is a proper way to understand it that is not subject to science and not in contradiction with physical reality, either.

When science puts forth its “evidence” and the associated conclusions, we must remember that it is on very shaky ground as far as divine faith is concerned, and generally not reliable. Soon others will come with supplementary data, or opposing data, or irreconcilable data. At times scientific reports are even fraudulent. And even in cases where science has a solid case with irrefutable facts regarding what it expects will happen in the future, or what could have happened in the past, it is nothing compared to the power of God. For God raises the dead (even when science is right that they were dead) and God diverts storms (even when science is right that it will surely hit) and God does many more things for those who place their absolute trust in Him. For science is only based on observation and the expectation that what happened before will happen again.

Jesus said Scripture cannot be broken, so we must reserve judgment on those things that science seems to disprove, because science can be wrong about the past and can’t guarantee the future, whereas God is all-powerful.

hurst

 

[cynic]

hurst:

You seem to ignore the gratitude owed to Him for creating those children in the first place. He has every right to dispose of His creation as He pleases, for everything is in His power. If something is not fair, I assure you that He will tend to it a lot sooner than you. The very fact that you have concern about innocent babies should make you realize that God cares, for He is the one inspiring you.

he might have the ‘right’ to ‘dispose’ of his creation, but does that make him just in doing so. We are given our entire natural lives by God to choose, they were not, what makes our lives more valuable to him than theirs? Is this consistent with a loving and fair god? I personally believe the story of the flood is a myth, (along with the idea of a literal 6000 year old creation).

hurst:

What I suspect you see in the mirror when you look toward God, is yourself. Could it be that the injustice you are attributing to God is actually your own? For when we look to God, it is like looking in a mirror. To the just He seems just, and to the wicked He seems wicked.

typical : argue the man instead of the message. Anyone who questions this or that about Christian belief, even from an unerstandable point of view, is by implication wicked.

 

[LilyM]

cynic:

he might have the ‘right’ to ‘dispose’ of his creation, but does that make him just in doing so. We are given our entire natural lives by God to choose, they were not, what makes our lives more valuable to him than theirs? Is this consistent with a loving and fair god?

Your mistake is to think of this earthly life as being all there is, and that somehow someone who is deprived of/shortened/disadvantaged in their earthly life has been treated unfairly. God has our eternal lives and souls to consider as well - how do we know he didn’t have better use for those he takes early in heaven? How do we know that suffering isn’t in fact a gift to better prepare us for eternal life?

Expecting an easy earthly life and eternal bliss in heaven as well is a bit like expecting to have your cake whole and eat it as well.

 

[hurst]

cynic:

he might have the ‘right’ to ‘dispose’ of his creation, but does that make him just in doing so.

Justice means to give someone their due.

If you act according to your rights, then you are being just.

cynic:

We are given our entire natural lives by God to choose, they were not, what makes our lives more valuable to him than theirs? Is this consistent with a loving and fair god?

What is your basis for determining what is loving and fair?

What makes you think their lives were not valued by Him? He says that the death of His faithful ones is most dear to Him. Consider the martyrs - they felt privileged to die for God. Those dying in the womb are just as much a part of God’s Will as those who are born handicapped or healthy or who die young or old or suddenly or after a long protracted illness.

Perhaps God allows them to die to cause us to think about our own lives, how precious our time is, and thus to contribute to our salvation. With God, everything matters.

At the same time, it is clearly a wakeup call to us to value our time more. You even acknowledge this point by asking what makes our lives more valuable than theirs. In a sense, the answer is that we have more time with which to honor our Maker. Instead of being offended at their shortened lives, be thankful both for what they did receive and what you now receive, for all belongs to God and is for God. Let us willingly participate according to our faith.

cynic:

typical : argue the man instead of the message.

If that is bad, then why are you complaining about God’s faults? Isn’t that also to “argue the man”?

cynic:

Anyone who questions this or that about Christian belief, even from an unerstandable point of view, is by implication wicked.

The way you question it is not innocent-sounding. You have a cynical belief about things, and thus tarnish your faith. Is that how you really want to be forever? Try putting some good will into your faith and standing up for goodness.

Jesus said:

John 3:18 He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the judgment: because the light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the light: for their works were evil. 20 For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved.

hurst

 

[cynic]

LilyM:

Your mistake is to think of this earthly life as being all there is, and that somehow someone who is deprived of/shortened/disadvantaged in their earthly life has been treated unfairly. God has our eternal lives and souls to consider as well - how do we know he didn’t have better use for those he takes early in heaven? How do we know that suffering isn’t in fact a gift to better prepare us for eternal life?

Expecting an easy earthly life and eternal bliss in heaven as well is a bit like expecting to have your cake whole and eat it as well.

they were described as wicked : God killed them for it.

We are wicked : we get a lifetime of opportunity for forgiveness.

God does not kill us. Old age, sickness or random accidents do.

The difference is that in the present (post NT) we send ourselves to hell by our own choice. But in (OT) times, esp. in regard to the flood, it is God who sends people to hell by destroying them for their wickedness. This does not seem fair or consistent - why are we given more chances, more opportunity than they?

That and there is the issue of a “chosen people”. Where is his concern for non-jews in the OT? What of the rest of the peoples of the earth? condemned to ignorance because of circumstance.

(who said anything about a easy earthly life. again personal accustions instead of proper argument)

 

[hurst]

cynic:

they were described as wicked : God killed them for it.

We are wicked : we get a lifetime of opportunity for forgiveness.

God did not send all those wicked people to eternal hell:

1 Peter 3:18 Because Christ also died once for our sins, the just for the unjust: that he might offer us to God, being put to death indeed in the flesh, but enlivened in the spirit, 19 In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison: 20 Which had been some time incredulous, when they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water.

So it seems to me that many must have repented when experiencing that miraculously huge punishment, being enabled to give God reverence as they died.

cynic:

God does not kill us. Old age, sickness or random accidents do.

If God does not kill us, then we have a reason to be thankful for the time we have to repent.

Besides, He promised not to send such a huge flood again.

cynic:

The difference is that in the present (post NT) we send ourselves to hell by our own choice. But in (OT) times, esp. in regard to the flood, it is God who sends people to hell by destroying them for their wickedness. This does not seem fair or consistent - why are we given more chances, more opportunity than they?

As I explained, they did not all end up in eternal hell.

We have more chances because of the saints praying for us on account of the merits of Christ, and because the beginnings of God’s Kingdom is on earth in the form of His Church. In the OT, only a seed was kept (Noah). But now, God has more reason to preserve the world (on account of His Church). But if those in the Church lose faith, then they too will be destroyed. Whole sections of the Church may fall away. But it will be preserved intact, no matter how small it may get.

cynic:

That and of course there is the issue of a “chosen people”. Where is his concern for non-jews in the OT?

He says “All peoples of the earth will be blessed through the descendents of Abraham”

Genesis 22:18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing, that God justifieth the Gentiles by faith, told unto Abraham before: In thee shall all nations be blessed.

cynic:

What of the rest of the peoples of the earth? condemned to ignorance because of circumstance.

You seem envious. Why not rejoice with those who were given God’s grace? For through them we are all blessed. That is how it pleased God to do so.

cynic:

(who said anything about a easy earthly life. again personal accustions instead of proper argument)

Your arguments are just gripes against God. You manifest a spirit that I would fight against in myself. Why do you give it place in yourself? It is evil! Wake up before it is too late and you get stuck with it forever. Fight it off by starving it; stop feeding it.

If you don’t listen, I at least hope others reading this will learn from it.

hurst

 

[cynic]

hurst:

God did not send all those wicked people to eternal hell:

1 Peter 3:18 Because Christ also died once for our sins, the just for the unjust: that he might offer us to God, being put to death indeed in the flesh, but enlivened in the spirit, 19 In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison: 20 Which had been some time incredulous, when they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water.

So it seems to me that many must have repented when experiencing that miraculously huge punishment, being enabled to give God reverence as they died.

If God does not kill us, then we have a reason to be thankful for the time we have to repent.

Besides, He promised not to send such a huge flood again.

that’s reasonable, but it remains then that they (those killed in the flood) seem to have been given a chance of everlasting life after Gods existence was made apparent to them (after or at the point of their deaths). No matter who you are, if you knew after your death that God was real, and were aware the choice before you, well you’re hardly going to choose hell are you?

now on the other hand…

hurst:

He says “All peoples of the earth will be blessed through the descendents of Abraham”

Genesis 22:18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing, that God justifieth the Gentiles by faith, told unto Abraham before: In thee shall all nations be blessed.

…if your one of the billions of chinese, indian, african and native amercan peoples who have lived and died without ever hearing of Christ or Christianity. This choice is not made apparent to you. “Invincible ignorance” may emplain how they may not have been destined for hell, but… can we assume that many of these people, if not most, are in hell when they would otherwise not be had they heard the message of Christianity? Fair … Did the God represented in the OT love every single one of them? Is a man living in tibet in the 7th century regarded as a descendant of Abraham? This is the majority of the human race we are talking about. And we aren’t supposed to even ask the question…

hurst:

That is how it pleased God to do so.

your alright with this because you along with most people now are given the priveledge of knowledge (supposedly). Thus your happy to philosophise away the value the others lives, as if they were nothing more than pawns in a infinitely complex game of chess, all for the creators glory, safe in the knowlege that you aren’t one of the pawns, or are on the winning side.

hurst:

Your arguments are just gripes against God. You manifest a spirit that I would fight against in myself. Why do you give it place in yourself? It is evil! Wake up before it is too late and you get stuck with it forever. Fight it off by starving it; stop feeding it.

If you don’t listen, I at least hope others reading this will learn from it.

hurst

ok then

 

[cynic]

…and what if those killed in the flood were sent to hell anyway? would you have a problem with that? by correcting me on this, by feeling the need to mention that God dealt with them in what appears to be a just way, aren’t you yourself placing limits on Gods actions by some preconception of what is just, like I have? What if he creates people simply for the purpose of going to hell, like for instance Esau, for whatever reason? doesn’t Paul describe Esau as being a man of the flesh, not spiritual, who asks for forgiveness out of self pity? (forget where in the NT this is) He cannot be anything but what he is made to be.

If he does what he pleases, and what he pleases is always just, then there should be no issue with all this.

 

[hurst]

cynic:

No matter who you are, if you knew after your death that God was real, and were aware the choice before you, well you’re hardly going to choose hell are you?

You’d think… but according to Sondra Abrahams, who is one of those people who died and came back to life, not everyone responds to God favorably even when they meet Him face to face. She was given a mission for when she returned. According to her, Jesus told her to watch a particular person’s response. She did not know this person, but he had just died after living a life as a very mean person. He was so much in the habit of cursing God and other such things, that when He was brought to Jesus, he didn’t even notice the loving look on Jesus’ face, and barely heard Jesus ask: “Do you love me, and are you sorry?”. He just manifested his cursing attitude to Jesus, and when facing the alternative of hell, he actually said “Just send me to hell”! Sondra couldn’t believe it, and was horrified, and is not even sure that the man realized he had died. It was as if he said those kind of things all the time jokingly, but now his own words dictated his eternal fate.

It is as if God is so non-intrusive, and yet makes our word count for so much, that we might inadvertently cause great harm not only to others but also to ourselves. Truly it can be said that we will have to account for every idle word we speak.

But even without such an experience as hers to relate to, we can see that when Jesus walked the earth, not everyone chose His way, even after seeing miracles for three years. It is for that reason that Jesus says they will receive greater judgment.

Jesus told Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen, and yet believe.”

cynic:

…if your one of the billions of chinese, indian, african and native amercan peoples who have lived and died without ever hearing of Christ or Christianity. This choice is not made apparent to you. Can we assume that many of these people, if not most, are in hell when they would otherwise not be had they heard the message of Christianity?

As a basic assumption, yes. However, the Church prays for them, so we can hope that those who follow their conscience and follow the inspiration of the graces given them as a result of the prayers of the Church, that they could obtain salvation in an exceptional way.

Keep in mind also that Christ Himself appeared to Saul and converted Him. And over the centuries, saints have been transported in spirit to remote places to preach and convert ignorant tribes. That happens for people who are open and seeking truth.

Remember that there are those in the Church who even after knowing the truth turn away. So hearing the Gospel is not the only component needed for salvation. One must be contrite and humble and obedient also.

cynic:

Fair … Did the God represented in the OT love every single one of them?

God had not fully revealed Himself in the OT. If so, then what new would sending His Son have been? He was clearly preparing the way. What we find done in the OT is a foreshadowing of what has been fulfilled in the NT on a spiritual level. That is why the NT requires us to live the law in our hearts by the grace Christ obtained for us. The law in the OT did not provide a means to fulfill it, but only a punishment for not fulfilling it. But the new law is obedience to Christ and His Church, and loving our neighbor as He loved us - and we are given the means to fulfill this by the Sacraments and the Holy Spirit which is given as a result of our obedience in faith.

People in the OT were given much from God, but they did not deserve more because they wasted what they were first given. Even the Israelites cheated on God, and He compared them to ungrateful children who run off after He found them naked and took care of them.

The patriarchs who proved their faith were the ones given great promises.

hurst

 

[hurst]

cynic:

Is a man living in tibet in the 7th century regarded as a descendant of Abraham?

A descendent of Abraham is of two kinds. One, a blood descendent, as the Jews and Arabs. And two, a child according to his same faith in God. Again, by blood, Jesus was given to the world and we have all been blessed on His account. And by faith, we all participate in the promise of life given to Abraham.

So someone in tibet could be a descendent by faith. (He might also be a Jew living in tibet, I suppose).

John 8:39 They answered, and said to him: Abraham is our father. Jesus saith to them: If you be the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham.

Galatians 3:7 Know ye therefore, that they who are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

cynic:

This is the majority of the human race we are talking about.

The Church has a lot of work to do to help them! We must pray, go on missions, become holy examples, etc. What is so sad and even scandalous is that in our country so many Catholics have the means to help others in the faith but themselves do not know it or live it or even seem to care about what it all means. We are so steeped in materialism that our Faith is some cultural curiosity that we don’t pay much attention to. I must apologize for this scandal to others, and I must even atone for them to God whom they offend greatly (especially since they should know better). And after having to apologize for my own past slackness, I am more interested in staying right with God.

cynic:

hurst:

That is how it pleased God to do so.

your alright with this because you along with most people now are given the priveledge of knowledge (supposedly).

That is precisely correct. I have bowed down to God as my God, I reverence His almighty power in conquering my nothingness and forcing me to make a choice for or against Him. I admire Him and furthermore I acknowledge that I did not give myself my life. I consider Him worthy of seeing His purpose accomplished in me regardless of what it might be, simply because He has the right to be pleased with what He made. For no matter what discomfort or pleasure I might experience, it is Him that causes it to be, and I consider Him witnessing my every moment and action. I cannot prevent or cause the next moment. I am carried along without effort. Right there I experience first-hand His power and care, regardless of whether a particular moment has pain or pleasure in it. The moment rules over pain or pleasure. The Lord is GOD. :bowdown:

cynic:

Thus your happy to philosophise away the value the others lives,

I would say that I change the perspective of what is considered of value. God is better than life, for He is the giver. If the giver decides to take it away, how can He be faulted? If we would be wise, then we should fear our Maker. We are totally dependent upon Him. He seems to hide this to see what we would do in a world we think we control. Scripture says we are subject to the judgment of our own actions because we are made in the image of God. God has to live forever with whatever He does, and so will we.

cynic:

safe in the knowlege that you aren’t one of the pawns, or your at least on the winning side.

But get this: we can decide which side to be on! We can choose to change sides. I am banking everything on my Creator. It makes sense, is challenging enough, and I have had the opportunity.

But yes, sort of like a pawn, I suppose, since I submit my will to whatever He wishes to do with me. But I love the thought of that! For so long I have wanted the best, and now I can rest assured that I am participating in the best possible plan, even if I didn’t think of it myself. For I have asked to receive something greater than that which I could think of or invent or even deserve. There is a price: I give my whole self to God. This is not easy and takes constant effort. After all, I keep getting more moments of time! And so I continue to give them back to Him as often as I remember. I make it a habit. And my confidence grows.

hurst

 

[hurst]

cynic:

…and what if those killed in the flood were sent to hell anyway? would you have a problem with that?

You make a good point, and the simple answer is that I have no right to have a problem with it.

I have accepted that God has the right to send me to hell regardless of what I do, and that He still deserves for me to give Him back what is His in the first place. But interestingly enough, He seems to have a better idea of what to do with my willingness… It is this that elicits my praise and love for Him - that even though He could do what He pleases with me, He shows me an idea He has that exceeds my greatest delight! And it is His idea, not mine. It only makes me more convinced I want to do His Will and not mine, because He has better ideas, when we truly seek to please Him.

cynic:

by correcting me on this, by feeling the need to mention that God dealt with them in what appears to be a just way, aren’t you yourself placing limits on Gods actions by some preconception of what is just, like I have?

Somewhat. I agree I would tend to seek for some way that those people weren’t simply thrown in hell with no chance for repentence. Afterall, such a chance is what I would want!

But it is not a denial of His justice, but rather a hope for His mercy. He is Just in anything He does.

cynic:

What if he creates people simply for the purpose of going to hell, like for instance Esau, for whatever reason? doesn’t Paul describe Esau as being a man of the flesh, not spiritual, who asks for forgiveness out of self pity? (forget where in the NT this is) He cannot be anything but what he is made to be.

If He wanted to, He could create beings explicitly for the purpose of sending them to hell. But then He would have to live with that decision for all eternity, wouldn’t He?

The Church teaches that God created souls for the purpose of making them happy in heaven. I understand this to be under the condition that we choose to obey Him willingly, even to the point of fighting any opposition to such obedience.

Thus, God is setting up a Kingdom, and doing so in such a way that He can manifest His divine attributes of power, justice, mercy, goodness, etc. It will be amazing when we see it! Let’s choose His side But woe to us if we choose against Him! For He will still make use of us, but we won’t be happy about it.

cynic:

If he does what he pleases, and what he pleases is always just, then there should be no issue with all this.

You are correct. But don’t forget that He prefers Mercy. And He won’t give us mercy unless we are willing to show mercy to others.

Therefore, let us ask for mercy, even while recognizing that He is just even if we don’t get it. Let us hope in His goodness, and that He wishes to show His goodness by means of His mercy.

For if we acknowledge His rights over us, and ask humbly for mercy, then we will truly be able to thank and praise Him if/when we receive it. Without that reverence for God, we can’t be grateful for what He gives us.

Hebrews 12:28 Therefore receiving an immoveable kingdom, we have grace; whereby let us serve, pleasing God, with fear and reverence.

Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, with a strong cry and tears, offering up prayers and supplications to him that was able to save him from death, was heard for his reverence.

hurst

 

[cynic]

hurst:

If He wanted to, He could create beings explicitly for the purpose of sending them to hell.

hurst

(your refering to an external moral law here that God is subject to. Why would he “have to life with” anything if everything he does is by definition just)

If all that matters is Gods glory, then would you be happy if he asked you to spend an eternity in hell in order to glorify him? Surely you would then, since your life only matters in as much as its potential to glorify. Perhaps you wouldn’t be filled with joy at the prospect with that though.

 

[PraRFLEsEkHm]

hurst:

You make a good point, and the simple answer is that I have no right to have a problem with it.

I have accepted that God has the right to send me to hell regardless of what I do, and that He still deserves for me to give Him back what is His in the first place. But interestingly enough, He seems to have a better idea of what to do with my willingness… It is this that elicits my praise and love for Him - that even though He could do what He pleases with me, He shows me an idea He has that exceeds my greatest delight! And it is His idea, not mine. It only makes me more convinced I want to do His Will and not mine, because He has better ideas, when we truly seek to please Him.

Somewhat. I agree I would tend to seek for some way that those people weren’t simply thrown in hell with no chance for repentence. Afterall, such a chance is what I would want!

But it is not a denial of His justice, but rather a hope for His mercy. He is Just in anything He does.

If He wanted to, He could create beings explicitly for the purpose of sending them to hell. But then He would have to live with that decision for all eternity, wouldn’t He?

The Church teaches that God created souls for the purpose of making them happy in heaven. I understand this to be under the condition that we choose to obey Him willingly, even to the point of fighting any opposition to such obedience.

Thus, God is setting up a Kingdom, and doing so in such a way that He can manifest His divine attributes of power, justice, mercy, goodness, etc. It will be amazing when we see it! Let’s choose His side But woe to us if we choose against Him! For He will still make use of us, but we won’t be happy about it.

You are correct. But don’t forget that He prefers Mercy. And He won’t give us mercy unless we are willing to show mercy to others.

Therefore, let us ask for mercy, even while recognizing that He is just even if we don’t get it. Let us hope in His goodness, and that He wishes to show His goodness by means of His mercy.

For if we acknowledge His rights over us, and ask humbly for mercy, then we will truly be able to thank and praise Him if/when we receive it. Without that reverence for God, we can’t be grateful for what He gives us.

Hebrews 12:28 Therefore receiving an immoveable kingdom, we have grace; whereby let us serve, pleasing God, with fear and reverence.

Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, with a strong cry and tears, offering up prayers and supplications to him that was able to save him from death, was heard for his reverence.

hurst

All I can say, to all of tyour above posts is

and may God Our father through Christ Jesus in the power of the Holy Spirit

 

[hurst]

(your refering to an external moral law here that God is subject to. Why would he “have to life with” anything if everything he does is by definition just)

This is not a moral law or even related to justice. Perhaps it is just common sense. If God does something for all eternity, then He “has to live with it” for the simple reason that He is doing it, enables it, and chooses to live with it.

cynic:

If all that matters is Gods glory, then would you be happy if he asked you to spend an eternity in hell in order to glorify him?

My own happiness comes from God, so if it would actually make Him happy for me to spend eternity there, then what is that to me? It then would not be sad, but the carrying out of a great commission by my master.

In fact, God Himself spends eternity in hell, in order to keep it in existence and ensure all punishment is just. Those who are in hell are not totally absent from God, for God’s power is intimately keeping them in existence. But they do not experience His mercy because they refuse to be merciful to others.

cynic:

Surely you would then, since your life only matters in as much as its potential to glorify.

Correct.

cynic:

Perhaps you wouldn’t be filled with joy at the prospect with that though.

On the surface, no. But if you think about it in terms of one who truly hinges their happiness on whether another (God) is happy, then one finds joy in that particular aspect, even though the prospect of suffering fire and reproach are not appealing to the senses.

And what I have found is that when God asks me to do things like go to hell, it turns out that He had some greater good in mind than I could have even thought of. For since He is goodness itself, He has good in mind.

For example, He told His Son Jesus to be tortured, crucified, and go to hell. Jesus obeyed reverently, even though His human side was not excited about it. And you know what? He conquered!

In the same way, if God tells us to go to hell, it may well be in order to conquer it. God is good. And if He says stay there forever, then it could very well mean to do some other good thing forever. But we cannot expect to be able to imagine the good He has in mind before we decide to be willing to accept it. Only faith can handle something so great.

hurst

 

[rossum]

Most of us seem to agree that killing unborn children is morally wrong. Where we disagree is on the question of whether God is subject to the moral law that makes it wrong to kill an unborn child.

I can quote Buddhist scriptures to the effect that all gods are subject to moral law, but that is not going to convince many of you. Hence I have to show that God is subject to moral law using Christian sources:

To show that God is subject to moral law.

P1 Moral Law applies to all human beings.
P2 Jesus is a human being.
L1 (P1, P2) Moral law applies to Jesus.

P3 Jesus is God.
C (L1, P3) Moral law applies to God

P# - premise
L# - lemma with derivation in brackets
C - conclusion

I do not think that many of you will disagree with the three premises, which are standard Christianity. If you disagree with the conclusion then you have to show an error in my logic.

rossum

 

[PraRFLEsEkHm]

rossum:

Most of us seem to agree that killing unborn children is morally wrong. Where we disagree is on the question of whether God is subject to the moral law that makes it wrong to kill an unborn child.

I can quote Buddhist scriptures to the effect that all gods are subject to moral law, but that is not going to convince many of you. Hence I have to show that God is subject to moral law using Christian sources:

To show that God is subject to moral law.

P1 Moral Law applies to all human beings.
P2 Jesus is a human being.
L1 (P1, P2) Moral law applies to Jesus.

P3 Jesus is God.
C (L1, P3) Moral law applies to God

P# - premise
L# - lemma with derivation in brackets
C - conclusion

I do not think that many of you will disagree with the three premises, which are standard Christianity. If you disagree with the conclusion then you have to show an error in my logic.

rossum

Where I believe you erred is in the idea that Jesus the man and Christ the Divine are equal (The same). Jesus Christ is two natures in One body: Jesus the man and Christ the Word (God).

See Here
Particularly this:

We confess that one and the same Christ, Lord, and only-begotten Son, is to be acknowledged in two natures without confusion, change, division or separation. The distinction between the natures was never abolished by their union, but rather the character proper to each of the two natures was preserved as they came together in one person (prosopon) and one hypostasis.92 {Emphasis Mine}

Jesus the man was subject to all the same temptations as we are, yet without sin - Jesus is Lord also, and as such carried on the work of the Divine Lord and second person of the Trinity, including, I would suppose, removing the life from those who were to die, around the world. Which, as Jesus the man - would have been a sin according to the Commandment. Exactly how this happened, altogether - is why it is called a mystery.

Peace

John

 

[hurst]

rossum:

Most of us seem to agree that killing unborn children is morally wrong.

Right, but the basis is that we did not create that life.

But if the Creator commands us to kill them, then not only is it right, but it would be wrong not to.

It would be wrong to think that human life is intrinsically more valuable than God. It isn’t. Why? Because it derives its value from God, Who willed it to be, and Who keeps it in existence.

rossum:

Where we disagree is on the question of whether God is subject to the moral law that makes it wrong to kill an unborn child.

As I said before, God’s law is stricter than ours. So in a sense He is does follow it, but not because He is subject to it in the same way we are, but rather because He is the cause of the Moral Law. He knows all things, and what to us looks like an infraction against some law will prove to be a case where God more thoroughly followed the Law than we could have even dreamed of. He is only subject to Himself.

rossum:

I can quote Buddhist scriptures to the effect that all gods are subject to moral law, but that is not going to convince many of you.

Is it Buddhist teaching that life is like a river, a stream that ever flows?

Well, consider this: what is more important, the river or the source thereof? Any river that blocks its source will dry up. But that source may of its own accord stop the flow of the river while not itself drying up. The Lord is GOD.

Scriptures teach that the gods of the gentiles are devils. Perhaps your Buddhist scriptures are referring to those…

DRV Psalms 95:5 For all the gods of the Gentiles are devils: but the Lord made the heavens.

rossum:

If you disagree with the conclusion then you have to show an error in my logic.

Since Jesus is God, you could use that logic to reduce God to any other human limitation. Here are a few:

P1 All human beings are subject to the law of gravity
P2 Jesus is a human being.
L1 (P1, P2) Law of gravity applies to Jesus.

P3 Jesus is God.
C (L1, P3) Law of gravity applies to God

P1 All human beings are created
P2 Jesus is a human being.
L1 (P1, P2) Being created applies to Jesus.

P3 Jesus is God.
C (L1, P3) Being created applies to God

We could make a whole list of similar things, “proving” God must eat, must have a physical body, etc.

And it is true in a sense. But only insofar as God lowers Himself to participate in our lives and elevate our nature. Thus, even when mystics are inspired by God, they must still obey their superior. So God is limited (in them) to the same obedience they are subject to. And when God becomes bread at Mass, He is subject to the laws of nature and to our control - but only insofar as He lets Himself be so.

There are also plenty of cases where God defies the natural laws. Thus, Jesus walks on water. Mystics bilocate to help people remotely when they are otherwise restricted. Holy Communion wafers float throught the air in obedience to the devotion of some saints. And so on.

However, we can also use the same logic the other way around:

P1 Moral Law does not apply to God
P2 Jesus is God
L1 (P1, P2) Moral Law does not apply to Jesus

P3 Jesus is a human being.
C (L1, P3) Moral Law does not apply to human beings

Thus, since God became man, we have been freed from the Law

But also:

P1 God is not created
P2 Jesus is God
L1 (P1, P2) Jesus is not created

P3 Jesus is a human being.
C (L1, P3) Human beings are not created

I hope by now you see the error. According to your logic, if Jesus is God, then since He is also human, all human limitations apply to God. But vice versa, all lack of limitations should apply to all humans.

In other words, your error is that not every human being is also God. Only Jesus has that claim. But we can participate by uniting ourselves to Jesus, by obedience and faith; by eating His Flesh in Communion; by living in Him and by Him and showing His charity. That is what our salvation is! But we still retain our created identity.

hurst