Christ's sacrafice

[jonfawkes]

He must, however, be himself. He cannot exist and not exist at the same time. He cannot be, no matter however powerful, both good and evil. He cannot create contradictions, like square circles.

Edit: What is this duality you bring up?

Duality is the notion that something is either one thing or another. Things come in pairs - up/ down, good /evil, exist / doesn’t exist. God is outside our duality. Duality is our experience not His. God is outside finite existence (duality) He is infinite.

 

[davidv]

Duality is the notion that something is either one thing or another. Things come in pairs - up/ down, good /evil, exist / doesn’t exist. God is outside our duality. Duality is our experience not His. God is outside finite existence (duality) He is infinite.

In my example I was using the law of noncontraction, an axiomate principle of logic. It does not refer in any way to what you have called duality. So what you state above has nothing to with the post you responded to.

 

[jonfawkes]

You are saying God can’t contradict Himself. I agree, but not for the same reason.

I am saying in order to have a contradiction you have to have opposites. Some examples Logical vs Illogical, Good vs Bad, High vs Low, front vs back these are examples of dualistic nature.

God is* infinite* so there is no opposite to God. God is beyond opposites, beyond duality, beyond paradox, beyond contradiction.

 

[tonyrey]

You are forgetting that omnipotence is not God’s only attribute. In His case might is **not **

Then your notion of God is an amoral, insane Monster devoid of love and compassion. You have come to the wrong forum…

 

[jonfawkes]

Then your notion of God is an amoral, insane Monster devoid of love and compassion. You have come to the wrong forum…

How do you draw that conclusion? All I said was

God is infinite so there is no opposite to God. God is beyond opposites, beyond duality, beyond paradox, beyond contradiction.

 

[tonyrey]

Do you think God can destroy Himself? Do you think God can destroy the universe and keep it in existence at the same time? Would God command us to hate, torture, rape and murder people? If not why not?

Yes if he chooses - that is omnipotence. He isn’t bound by duality.Then your notion of God is an amoral, insane Monster devoid of love and compassion. You have come to the wrong forum…How do you draw that conclusion? All I said was

God is infinite so there is no opposite to God. God is beyond opposites, beyond duality, beyond paradox, beyond contradiction.

You put omnipotence before everything else, i.e. might = right. You agreed that God can destroy Himself and command us to hate, torture, rape and murder people…

 

[jonfawkes]

You put omnipotence before everything else, i.e. might = right. You agreed that God can destroy Himself and command us to hate, torture, rape and murder people…

I said that He could. You asked me a hypothetical question can God contradict Himself - being omnipotent, Yes, He could if He chose to. For the reason I stated. There is no opposite to God. The rest is projection on your part.

 

[tonyrey]

You put omnipotence before everything else, i.e. might = right. You agreed that God can destroy Himself and command us to hate, torture, rape and murder people…

On the contrary. God cannot destroy Himself or command us to do evil because He is good. The Creator cannot be the Destroyer or the Devil.

Your mistake is to consider omnipotence in isolation from His other attributes…

 

[jonfawkes]

On the contrary. God cannot destroy Himself or command us to do evil because He is good. The Creator cannot be the Destroyer or the Devil.

Your mistake is to consider omnipotence in isolation from His other attributes…

No, I am saying that we as humans see contradiction, we need that to understand something. God isn’t bound by that. It’s His infinite nature I’m addressing. Without limits.

It’s like the notion that God is omnipresent - “Where is God, God is everywhere” It is illogical to our experience - How can something be everywhere? It has to be here OR there. That’s how we experience the world. God is infinite so here and there have no meaning - He is everywhere. There is no place. He is beyond place, beyond the duality of here not there.

 

[tonyrey]

No, I am saying that we as humans see contradiction, we need that to understand something. God isn’t bound by that. It’s His infinite nature I’m addressing. Without limits.

It’s like the notion that God is omnipresent - “Where is God, God is everywhere” It is illogical to our experience - How can something be everywhere? It has to be here OR there. That’s how we experience the world. God is infinite so here and there have no meaning - He is everywhere. There is no place. He is beyond place, beyond the duality of here not there.

I agree with you but omnipresence doesn’t conflict with omnipotence, goodness or love whereas omnipotence is curtailed by goodness and love.

BTW This is becoming a fascinating theological investigation. Who says theology is bunk?

 

[jonfawkes]

I agree with you but omnipresence doesn’t conflict with omnipotence, goodness or love whereas omnipotence is curtailed by goodness and love.

BTW This is becoming a fascinating theological investigation. Who says theology is bunk?

But you are discounting His infinite nature. Infinite means without limits. So if you put a limit on Him, i.e. “He can’t act contrary to His inherent goodness” You are saying He isn’t infinite.

What we see as moral evil may not be so in the eyes of good. So it may appear that it is evil to our duality, God being above duality doesn’t see it that way. This is where faith comes in, that we have to believe and trust that He in His infinite wisdom knows what is best. So it transcends our duality of right vs wrong.

 

[tonyrey]

But you are discounting His infinite nature. Infinite means without limits. So if you put a limit on Him, i.e. “He can’t act contrary to His inherent goodness” You are saying He isn’t infinite.

 

[jonfawkes]

Name something that you see as evil that God cannot do. You are still using duality to define God. He can’t do x - If that is so, He is not infinite.

 

[tonyrey]

Name something that you see as evil that God cannot do. You are still using duality to define God. He can’t do x - If that is so, He is not infinite.

God cannot destroy Himself - not because His power is limited but because self-destruction is a negation of existence and a rejection of love. Divine perfection is positive in every respect…

 

[jonfawkes]

Again you are using duality to create the paradox. Exist vs not exist. You are confusing how you see God and experience Him with his nature. These don’t mean anything to His nature. Infinite. It has nothing to do with power. Nothing to do with perfection vs flawed. No limitations. Once you draw a line and say Here not Here, This not That, you are putting finite quantification on God. It’s not possible He’s infinite. The qualifiers are in your mind not His nature.

 

[OvrlapnMagstria]

Sorry for the delay, I didn’t get a chance to log on for awhile.

God **permitted **the Fall to occur. He is the ultimate Cause and has **ultimate **responsibility for everything - which is quite different from being the direct cause and having direct responsibility.

The analogy fails because men are not like bullets; they know and choose what they are doing.

But the aspect of choice was irrelevant to the point I was making with the analogy. God knew that man would choose evil, just as a killer knows that a bullet will pierce the heart. Try this analogy: A camp director knowingly hires a pedophile and lets him be alone with children. If the director knows that the pedophile is planning to abuse, he is responsible. Whether that responsibility is direct or indirect is irrelevant. God created us knowing we would sin and therefore holds responsibility for it… yet we pay all of the price.

It would be a greater evil not to create the world because evil occurs. Do you regret having been born?

This is a false dichotomy. You are assuming that the only possible way that the universe could have been created is the way that it was. The options are not this universe or no universe. They are this universe, no universe, or any of the infinite conceivable kinds of universes imaginable. How about making a universe with a garden without a forbidden tree smack in the middle of it? How about a universe without the requirement that sins be paid with blood? How about a universe where people have the free will and could sin, but do not have concupiscence so that they do not? There are many, many options.

It seems very weird from your point of view! Human beings are not objects which are built, broken and then patched up. They are persons capable of distinguishing good from evil and choosing how to live. Would you prefer to be a puppet?

I agree! But that is how it seems in the Christian point of view. God created man knowing that he would fall; knowing that they would need redemption. And being a puppet is not the only other option.

 

[tonyrey]

God cannot destroy Himself - not because His power is limited but because self-destruction is a negation of existence and a rejection of love. Divine perfection is positive in every respect…

There is no paradox. You are using the distinction between existence and non-existence as if it is inconsistent with God’s unity. Yet that duality existed even before God created anything.

Do you accept or reject my claims:

1. Self-destruction is a negation of existence and a rejection of love.
2. Divine perfection is positive in every respect. ?

You are confusing how you see God and experience Him with his nature. These don’t mean anything to His nature. Infinite. It has nothing to do with power. Nothing to do with perfection vs flawed. No limitations. Once you draw a line and say Here not Here, This not That, you are putting finite quantification on God. It’s not possible He’s infinite. The qualifiers are in your mind not His nature.

God is infinite but when He created finite beings He drew a line between Himself and what He has created. By creating an orderly universe He** limited **Himself to the laws of nature He designed. He can suspend those laws whenever He chooses but if He does so too often the universe will become disorderly and defeat the purpose for which it is created: to sustain living organisms and rational beings. A spate of miracles would lead to chaos and confusion.

Not only that. By giving us free will He has given us the power to defy Him and frustrate His Will. He could use His power to force us to obey Him but there again it would defeat the purpose of giving us free will - which is to choose how to live and determine our own destiny. He has limited His freedom by sharing His power with us.

 

[jonfawkes]

There is no paradox. You are using the distinction between existence and non-existence as if it is inconsistent with God’s unity. Yet that duality existed even before God created anything.

Do you accept or reject my claims:

1. Self-destruction is a negation of existence and a rejection of love.
2. Divine perfection is positive in every respect. ?

God is infinite but when He created finite beings He drew a line between Himself and what He has created. By creating an orderly universe He** limited **Himself to the laws of nature He designed. He can suspend those laws whenever He chooses but if He does so too often the universe will become disorderly and defeat the purpose for which it is created: to sustain living organisms and rational beings. A spate of miracles would lead to chaos and confusion.

Not only that. By giving us free will He has given us the power to defy Him and frustrate His Will. He could use His power to force us to obey Him but there again it would defeat the purpose of giving us free will - which is to choose how to live and determine our own destiny. He has limited His freedom by sharing His power with us.

No that duality didn’t exist - If it did, there was a time when God didn’t exist. God is out side of time. It meaningless to talk about “before creation” before creation there was no time. Time is a prerequisite for existence. i.e. “now something exists, now it doesn’t,” you need to have a “when” to make the distinction.

Your assertions are irrelevant they are dualities. Either “this” or “that.”

Do you have a user manual that I don’t know about? - You are asserting God has a finite amount of tinkering that He can do before the world falls apart. How can you possibly assert that?

You can turn away from God you can’t frustrate His will. You can choose to swim upstream, You can’t choose to live when He thinks you should die. That would be defying his will - that we can’t do.

 

[tonyrey]

There is no paradox. You are using the distinction between existence and non-existence as if it is inconsistent with God’s unity. Yet that duality existed even before God created anything.

There was no time before Creation but Creation marks the beginning of time. God is outside time but the universe is in time. In other words it is not eternal and it had a beginning. Creation established a duality, i.e. the distinction between physical existence and physical non-existence. There is also a spiritual duality, i.e. the distinction between spiritual existence and spiritual non-existence.

Some physicists and cosmologists believe everything has come nothing. I believe they are mistaken but it is a logical possibility. The duality of (and the choice between) God and nothing is not an illusion. The onus is on you to prove that “nothing” is a meaningless word.

Your assertions are irrelevant they are dualities. Either “this” or “that.”

You think you can dispose of all my points with "Either “this” or “that.”!

Do you have a user manual that I don’t know about?

The same question can be equally facilely applied to you! It does nothing to further the discussion.

• You are asserting God has a finite amount of tinkering that He can do before the world falls apart. How can you possibly assert that?

How do you reach that conclusion?

You can turn away from God you can’t frustrate His will.

So all the evil in the world is God’s Will? You are confirming your view that he is a Monster!
If you are a Catholic why do you pray “Thy Will be done”? It does not make sense if God’s Will can never be frustrated…

You can choose to swim upstream, You can’t choose to live when He thinks you should die.

What does that prove? That we can **never **disobey God’s Will?

That would be defying his will - that we can’t do.
If we can’t defy His will we’re all saints and we all go to heaven. Is that what you believe? Or is it His Will that we all go to hell because He is evil?

 

[jonfawkes]

There was no time before Creation but Creation marks the beginning of time. God is outside time but the universe is in time. In other words it is not eternal and it had a beginning. Creation established a duality, i.e. the distinction between physical existence and physical non-existence. There is also a spiritual duality, i.e. the distinction between spiritual existence and spiritual non-existence.

Some physicists and cosmologists believe everything has come nothing. I believe they are mistaken but it is a logical possibility. The duality of (and the choice between) God and nothing is not an illusion. The onus is on you to prove that “nothing” is a meaningless word.

You think you can dispose of all my points with "Either “this” or “that.”!

The same question can be equally facilely applied to you! It does nothing to further the discussion.
How do you reach that conclusion?

So all the evil in the world is God’s Will? You are confirming your view that he is a Monster!
If you are a Catholic why do you pray “Thy Will be done”? It does not make sense if God’s Will can never be frustrated…

What does that prove? That we can **never **disobey God’s Will?

That would be defying his will - that we can’t do.
If we can’t defy His will we’re all saints and we all go to heaven. Is that what you believe? Or is it His Will that we all go to hell because He is evil?

God is not part of creation He is the creator. I don’t understand why you are defining Him in terms of creation i.e. time and existence.

How can you say God is good or evil if He’s outside creation. We may see disease as evil but it is part of creation. It is our view point that we are using by saying Good or Evil. To say God is all Good you are judging God. You’ve taken a scale, based on our need for duality, Either This End “Good” or that end “Evil” a monster. You are still defining and judging God based on your understanding of reality which is dualistic.

We are “judged” by God’s grace, not works or faith alone. Who knows where any of us are going. The choice to live in that grace is ours - no?