Conference on Evolution

[hecd2]

Did you read the entire article, or just my excerpt?

The point goes back to God’s original plan for us and how original sin screwed that up. There are some things we can’t make better, but many things we can prevent from getting worse.

The entire article. It is as I said - patronising and facile. The message that all suffering is potentially redemptive and/or caused by “Original Sin” is not just plain wrong but pathologically devoid of empathy.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[StAnastasia]

I understand. My argument is not all that important.

Granny, thanks for understanding. I’m struggling to get out from under this article on “Faith and Science,” which was due a couple of weeks ago. But my choir has a truckload of music to prepare for the Triduum, so it may not be until next week that I get around to finishing it…

 

[buffalo]

Granny, thanks for understanding. I’m struggling to get out from under this article on “Faith and Science,” which was due a couple of weeks ago. But my choir has a truckload of music to prepare for the Triduum, so it may not be until next week that I get around to finishing it…

Perhaps you would allow CAF posters to review it for orthodoxy and purify it of any heresies before submitting it.

 

[StAnastasia]

Perhaps you would allow CAF posters to review it for orthodoxy and purify it of any heresies before submitting it.

Funny!

 

[StAnastasia]

The entire article. It is as I said - patronising and facile. The message that all suffering is potentially redemptive and/or caused by “Original Sin” is not just plain wrong but pathologically devoid of empathy.Alec

Alec, here’s a different perspective:

“The crucified but risen Jesus appears in the believing, assembled community of the church. That this sense of the risen, living Jesus has faded in many [churches] can be basically blamed on the fact that our churches are insufficiently ‘communities’ of God…. Where the church of Jesus Christ lives, and lives a liberating life in the footsteps of Jesus, the resurrection faith undergoes no crisis. On the other hand, it is better not to believe in God than to believe in a God who minimizes human beings, holds them under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come.”

—Edward Schillebeeckx, The Church with a Human Face: A New and Expanded Theology of Ministry, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM, 1985), p. 34.

 

[ricmat]

Alec, here’s a different perspective:

“The crucified but risen Jesus appears in the believing, assembled community of the church. That this sense of the risen, living Jesus has faded in many [churches] can be basically blamed on the fact that our churches are insufficiently ‘communities’ of God…. Where the church of Jesus Christ lives, and lives a liberating life in the footsteps of Jesus, the resurrection faith undergoes no crisis. On the other hand, it is better not to believe in God than to believe in a God who minimizes human beings, holds them under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come.”

—Edward Schillebeeckx, The Church with a Human Face: A New and Expanded Theology of Ministry, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM, 1985), p. 34.

With regard to the part I bolded in the above quote…

No, that’s wrong. It is better to believe in God, even if our image of him is incorrect, than to reject belief in God because he doesn’t meet our standards.

 

[StAnastasia]

With regard to the part I bolded in the above quote…No, that’s wrong. It is better to believe in God, even if our image of him is incorrect, than to reject belief in God because he doesn’t meet our standards.

As you wish. I cannot believe in a God holds people under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come.

 

[ricmat]

As you wish. I cannot believe in a God holds people under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come.

You seem to be saying that if God is not as you believe him to be, that you would reject his existence.

Amazing thing for a theologian to say.

As a non-theologian, I believe in God, but admit that I don’t understand God perfectly. So no matter what I think about God, it might be incomplete or wrong. But God Is, in any case, and God Is what God Is, no matter our preferences.

 

[StAnastasia]

You seem to be saying that if God is not as you believe him to be, that you would reject his existence. Amazing thing for a theologian to say.

Yes, it would be amazing, if I had said that.

 

[ricmat]

Yes, it would be amazing, if I had said that.

It’s good to know that you don’t believe such nonsense.

For the purposes of clarification then, perhaps you could agree or disagree with the statement I made below.

I believe in God, but admit that I don’t understand God perfectly. So no matter what I think about God, it might be incomplete or wrong. But God Is, in any case, and God Is what God Is, no matter our preferences.

 

[hecd2]

With regard to the part I bolded in the above quote…

No, that’s wrong. It is better to believe in God, even if our image of him is incorrect, than to reject belief in God because he doesn’t meet our standards.

Do you **believe in a God who minimizes human beings, holds them under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come ?

**A simple yes or no will suffice.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[grannymh]

Do you believe in a God who minimizes human beings, holds them under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come ?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Hopefully, one sentence will suffice. Otherwise my yes would sound like an answer to “Have you stopped beating your hubby?”

I believe in God; however, I flat out refuse to impose my personal evaluation of “godness” [sic] on a transcendental being.

Easter blessings and good thoughts to all.

granny

 

[ricmat]

As you wish. I cannot believe in a God holds people under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come.

Above is the original quote that got this started. I’ve bolded a key word.

Do you **believe in a God who minimizes human beings, holds them under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come ?

**A simple yes or no will suffice.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

The original quote is the first one above. “I cannot believe…” This is different than “I do not believe…”

My answer to that is that I can believe in the existence of God, regardless of exactly what I think him to be. Whether the real God conforms to my image of him or not, I believe that God exists. My limited understanding of God is that he doesn’t minimize human beings, or holds them under, or oppresses them (in fact, quite the contrary), but if it were somehow revealed to me that this indeed was God, then I wouldn’t say that I refuse to believe that he exists.

 

[hecd2]

Above is the original quote that got this started. I’ve bolded a key word.

The original quote is the first one above. “I cannot believe…” This is different than “I do not believe…”

My answer to that is that I can believe in the existence of God, regardless of exactly what I think him to be. Whether the real God conforms to my image of him or not, I believe that God exists. My limited understanding of God is that he doesn’t minimize human beings, or holds them under, or oppresses them (in fact, quite the contrary), but if it were somehow revealed to me that this indeed was God, then I wouldn’t say that I refuse to believe that he exists.

Are you sure? Because the problem doesn’t arise for you - you don’t believe in a **God who minimizes human beings, holds them under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come. **And the reason it doesn’t arise, is because the concept of God in which you **do believe **does not behave this way. It’s easy to say you’d believe in God whatever his attributes, but surely your belief is bound up with the nature of what you believe in. Belief in God, regardless of His attributes, will quickly lead you into patently absurd scenarios. Would you believe in God if the proposition is that He is the direct author of all the evil in the world, if He is constantly cruel, unjust, uncaring, hateful and capricious? You will say that my suggestion is preposterous because that is not like God - in other words there are some hypothetical propositions about God which you would reject. I don’t see that StA is doing any more than this - saying that his/her belief in God depends upon his/her understanding about what God actually is - defining what God is, is surely an important step in assenting to the proposition.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[ricmat]

Are you sure? Because the problem doesn’t arise for you - you don’t believe in a **God who minimizes human beings, holds them under and oppresses them, with a view to a better world to come. **And the reason it doesn’t arise, is because the concept of God in which you **do believe **does not behave this way. It’s easy to say you’d believe in God whatever his attributes, but surely your belief is bound up with the nature of what you believe in. Belief in God, regardless of His attributes, will quickly lead you into patently absurd scenarios. Would you believe in God if the proposition is that He is the direct author of all the evil in the world, if He is constantly cruel, unjust, uncaring, hateful and capricious? You will say that my suggestion is preposterous because that is not like God - in other words there are some hypothetical propositions about God which you would reject. I don’t see that StA is doing any more than this - saying that his/her belief in God depends upon his/her understanding about what God actually is - defining what God is, is surely an important step in assenting to the proposition.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

I believe that God exists. Period.

I also know that my understanding of him is not perfect.

I put no conditions on belief in God’s existence. Period. And I certainly don’t require God to conform to any expectations of mine in order to believe in him. StA seems to have requirements on God’s behavior to believe in him.

There are things which I think I know about God, based on church teachings. But belief in the existence of God stands independently by itself.

 

[hecd2]

I believe that God exists. Period.

I also know that my understanding of him is not perfect.

I put no conditions on belief in God’s existence. Period. And I certainly don’t require God to conform to any expectations of mine in order to believe in him.

So what is it that you believe in (other than a word)?

A

 

[Orogeny]

After my brief visit to your thread and before leaving, here are my observations:

Welcome back Peter.

I will not be reading any responses to this post as I will no longer be a member of the thread.

Too bad. I have missed you. How is Messr. Berthault these days?

Peace

Tim

 

[StAnastasia]

StA seems to have requirements on God’s behavior to believe in him.

I do – human sacrifice is out. If God told me that the sun will not rise tomorrow within sacrificing twenty captives in Tenochtitlan, I would dump that God like a hot potato. If God told me to sacrifice my only son as a burnt offering on Mount Moriah, I would judge God a raving lunatic.

Happy Easter!

 

[StAnastasia]

I do – human sacrifice is out. If God told me that the sun will not rise tomorrow within sacrificing twenty captives in Tenochtitlan, I would dump that God like a hot potato. If God told me to sacrifice my only son as a burnt offering on Mount Moriah, I would judge God a raving lunatic.Happy Easter!

Sorry – I meant “without sacrificing twenty captives.”

 

[ricmat]

I do – human sacrifice is out. If God told me that the sun will not rise tomorrow [without] sacrificing twenty captives in Tenochtitlan, I would dump that God like a hot potato. If God told me to sacrifice my only son as a burnt offering on Mount Moriah, I would judge God a raving lunatic.

Happy Easter!

Happy Easter to you too.

The most essential essence of God is being. God IS. So he told Moses who was the first to know God’s name.

So unlike Abraham, you would think God a raving lunatic?

Or was Abraham a raving lunatic for attempting to go through with it?