Well, since you don’t even seem to know how to recognize it (see below), I doubt that we can continue on this vein.
I rather doubt that there is
anything wrong with trusting God. Because
THAT is what I said. And I DID say that I am able to recognize the love of other human beings (and not just the love of my niece). And since I admitted that I never experienced God’s love in any form that I could recognize, that should not be surprising that I cannot answer your question - which just seemed to be a usual attempt to change the goalposts.
Annnnnd here it is, folks. Again. Another example of the atheist saying, “I demand A, B and C!”
I do not find it offensive to be called an “atheist”, after all there are many very smart ones (just as there are many very smart theists). But I do take an exception to be called an atheist, when I did not declare my philosophical stance at all… NOT AT ALL.
While some blogs may be “unsupported personal opinion”, true, but that is not to be construed as: blogs are “unsupported personal opinion ONLY”.
Of course not. But in THAT particular blog all I saw was a personal opinion.
Oh, dear. Be careful, Vera, about insulting your hosts here on the CAFs.
What is “insulting” about disagreement? Can you show a Catholic teaching which asserts that God is NOT the only necessarily existing Being, and
NOT everything else is contingent upon God’s will to sustain them in existence (the soul)? Because I have never seen one. By the way… you can safely stop these “friendly warnings” about what we can or cannot say… let the mods make these decisions. It would be more fruitful to actually engage in a dialog, instead of these thinly veiled threats.
Tim Staples in a Catholic Apologist employed by your host. In fact, he is the Director of Apologetics here.
So it’s not very wise to come here and say that the Catholic Apologist who is the Director of Apologetics on the very forum you’re participating in, is stating things “contrary to the Catholic concept”.
You can be pretty much assured that what he posts is “consonant with the Catholic concept”.
I was under the impression that ONLY the Pope is infallible, and ONLY when he speaks ex-cathedra. Everyone else can make mistakes. Of course I would be delighted to have a dialog with him directly.
I think, perhaps, a better metaphor for God’s love (especially if one is familiar with Scripture) would be that of a husband and wife.
A husband and a wife are approximately on the same level of development, God and we are not. God’s actual love would be so overwhelming that no one would wish to reject it. At least that is how I see it. But if you say that you actually
experienced God’s love and rejected it, then all I could say is that I am sorry for you.
And I would not want to insinuate any dishonesty on your part, but I wonder if the inability to understand how one could reject love is simply a pretense? Yes?
Then why do you do it? “Pretense”
IS “dishonesty”.
It’s almost as if…it’s an irrefutable point being made against your argument, no?
No. Not even close.
“God can do anything! He can even make this, using topology, be called a triangle! Yep That’s my argument”
Not “called”, rather “changed into”. It does not require omnipotence to draw the circle on a rubber sheet, then apply the topological transformation… and the circle changes into triangle. Then let the stretch go, and the triangle changes back into a circle.
The point was that you cannot treat the alleged “immortality” of the the soul as a mathematical axiom. It needs to be proven. And even if you could prove it, that would not prevent God from stopping sustaining the soul which would then disappear. Obviously God could not create a married bachelor, that would be a logical inconsistency. But there is nothing logically impossible about withholding the sustaining power from a “soul”.
But I am getting bored.
It is time to finish this conversation. If you would analyze those points I made and would offer some actual, valid criticism, I
might decide to continue. But for the time being there is no reason to consider your attempts to wiggle out and change the goalposts.
Vera_Ljuba
Vera is very patient with you. You convince no one, PR. Do you like to throw one-person parties with a cake that says ''Congrats you’re right again".? I thought you would have done some deep soul searching during the time when your account was under review. The people who ‘‘debate’’ with you come away either rolling their eyes, irritated, but never convinced.