Did God Create the Best Possible Universe?

[Tom_Baum]

Not according to the Roman Catholic Nicene Creed which says that Jesus is God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God.

The Catholic Church teaches that Jesus is True God and True Man, not just God.

I, personally, believe that Jesus gave up His Omni’s when He became One of us.

God is a Being of Love in that Love is not an attribute of God but is God’s Very Being.

I also believe that no human being can “conceive” of Love as being a Being, this would either have to be believed by faith or revealed someway or another by God.

 

[Tom_Baum]

1.Time is irrelevant because our minds transcend time and space. It is tempting to think in terms of “**before **we existed” and “**when **we exist” but it is a mistake Either we exist or we don’t. The choices of non-existent persons are unknowable just as nothing is unknowable because there is nothing to be known! God knows everything about created minds and nothing about uncreated minds. Omniscience is knowledge of everything that exists. That is why it is absurd to complain that God shouldn’t have created us without consulting us.
2. “The parody of love” exists only in the mind of the person who rejects the love of the One who created us and liberated us from evil. It is up to us to choose whether to accept liberation or to remain isolated and tormented by our bitterness. We are the only ones who can decide.

I happen to agree that if God is Omniscient than God knew/knows absolutely everything about everyone that has been or will be created and taking ALL of this into account that God came up with a Plan even before creation for the SALVATION FOR ALL.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Based on what we do know about God’s justice, that “whoever is not with me is against me”, that the minimal requirement for entrance into eternal hell is one mortal sin unrepented of or not repented of properly (perfect contrition or formal confession, although God is not bound by these), is it reasonable to think a fair proportion of humanity is headed there or already there? The Church makes no quantitative pronouncement on hell, but from God’s word, we can reasonably infer that many, if not most are there or on their way. “For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter”. Achilles made no mention of predestination. Assuming 1/3 of all of humankind down the ages is in hell would be a lot of people! Billions of people. I always took the “1/3 of angels” to mean “more than just a handful”, “a significant proportion of”. The hope that no one is in hell is childish, futile and wishful thinking.

As far as “The hope that no one is in hell is childish, futile and wishful thinking”.

Are you telling others just what they can or can not hope for?

Are you telling God that God can not have a Plan that is for the Salvation of ALL?

There is much written in the bible, what is your opinion concerning the verses that say, “This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all.”?

Pretty simple words in the verses quoted above, could be that they simply mean what they simply say.

Ever given any thought to just what Jesus accomplished on the cross?

There was much more going on at the cross than Jesus dying physically.

 

[Tom_Baum]

I don’t know but what you say makes sense to me.

It is not God’s love, His compassion and mercy, what is at issue is the evil in men’s hearts.
Mankind has been saved and redeemed. What each individual chooses for himself is another matter.
There are some very bad people in this world. People who would redo the harm they have brought into existence, again and again if they had the chance.

Sure it is sin and Christ will take it from us. But if we cling to it, if we refuse to let go?
If one does not repent, does not acknowledge his wrongdoings, does not care about those whom one has hurt, I can’t see how there is any place for that person in paradise.
Heaven, after all, is the seat of love, of giving all that is oneself to God. It makes no sense.
That God can make us do that (separate us unwillingly from the sin we have become) is as nonsensical.
He would do that in a moment right now. No more wars; no more hate. What would be the point of all this terrible misery?
We have the freedom of choosing whom we will become. There will be justice; and, it will be true - the judge is Love.

It seems that quite a few people are of the opinion that if they can NOT figure a way for God to be able to do something than there is no way that God can figure a way to do something such as “convincing someone of something without forcing them”.

I find it rather amazing that we can believe that God created absolutely everything out of absolutely nothing and that this same God can NOT figure out how to do things that we think are impossible.

I have said before and I will say it again, I truly believe that some of those that believe in God are in for a much bigger surprise when they meet God than some of those that do not believe in God when they meet God.

 

[nownzen]

As far as “The hope that no one is in hell is childish, futile and wishful thinking”.

Are you telling others just what they can or can not hope for?

Are you telling God that God can not have a Plan that is for the Salvation of ALL?

There is much written in the bible, what is your opinion concerning the verses that say, “This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all.”?

Pretty simple words in the verses quoted above, could be that they simply mean what they simply say.

Ever given any thought to just what Jesus accomplished on the cross?

There was much more going on at the cross than Jesus dying physically.

Universalism is not an accepted belief. Would I want everyone, after proper conversion of their will and expiation, to go to Heaven? Yep. Do I think based on a whole lot of considerations that they will? Nope.

It seems that quite a few people are of the opinion that if they can NOT figure a way for God to be able to do something than there is no way that God can figure a way to do something such as “convincing someone of something without forcing them”.

I find it rather amazing that we can believe that God created absolutely everything out of absolutely nothing and that this same God can NOT figure out how to do things that we think are impossible.

I have said before and I will say it again,** I truly believe that some of those that believe in God are in for a much bigger surprise when they meet God than some of those that do not believe in God when they meet God**.

I hope that’s true. But I see no basis from which to conclude that it might be true.

 

[clem456]

We can debate all we want whether or how many souls are in hell, but the Church does not exist for that purpose. The Church exists to proclaim the Gospel. The Gospel is literally “the good news”. That’s what the word Gospel means.

 

[clem456]

Universalism is not an accepted belief. Would I want everyone, after proper conversion of their will and expiation, to go to Heaven? Yep. Do I think based on a whole lot of considerations that they will? Nope.

He is not proposing universalism.

 

[nownzen]

He is not proposing universalism.

What is he proposing, then? God wills that everyone be saved, Jesus died to save everyone from sin and from eternal death, which is what sin ultimately leads to. But “The smoke of their torment will ascend day and night for ever and ever”. I’m willing to be enlightened.

 

[clem456]

What is he proposing, then?

This is what he said:

Originally Posted by Tom Baum View Post
As far as “The hope that no one is in hell is childish, futile and wishful thinking”.

Are you telling others just what they can or can not hope for?

Are you telling God that God can not have a Plan that is for the Salvation of ALL?

There is much written in the bible, what is your opinion concerning the verses that say, “This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all.”?

Pretty simple words in the verses quoted above, could be that they simply mean what they simply say.

Ever given any thought to just what Jesus accomplished on the cross?

There was much more going on at the cross than Jesus dying physically.
God wills that everyone be saved, Jesus died to save everyone from sin and from eternal death, which is what sin ultimately leads to. But “The smoke of their torment will ascend day and night for ever and ever”. I’m willing to be enlightened.

I don’t want to speak for the poster, but he was not proposing universalism, which holds that all humanity will be saved outside of free will. Christ redeems all humanity, but a person cannot be saved against their own free will.
Anticipating the objection… “that proves then that hell is populated with billions of people”, we simply don’t know that. We hope that every person chose Christ in the mystery of salvation.

 

[Tom_Baum]

This is what he said:

I don’t want to speak for the poster, but he was not proposing universalism, which holds that all humanity will be saved outside of free will. Christ redeems all humanity, but a person cannot be saved against their own free will.
Anticipating the objection… “that proves then that hell is populated with billions of people”, we simply don’t know that. We hope that every person chose Christ in the mystery of salvation.

You wrote, “I don’t want to speak for the poster, but he was not proposing universalism, which holds that all humanity will be saved outside of free will.”

What does “all humanity will be saved outside of free will”, mean?

I know what “all humanity will be saved” means but what does “outside of free will” mean?

Does “outside of free will”, mean that God “overrides”, so to speak, someone’s free will?

It does say in 1 Tim 2 that “This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth”, and I believe this and hope and pray for this.

Just because many of us do not think that God can convince without forcing ALL, does not mean that God can not convince without forcing ALL.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Universalism is not an accepted belief. Would I want everyone, after proper conversion of their will and expiation, to go to Heaven? Yep. Do I think based on a whole lot of considerations that they will? Nope.

I hope that’s true. But I see no basis from which to conclude that it might be true.

expiation:noun

1. the act of expiating.
2. the means by which atonement or reparation is made.

Isn’t that what Jesus is supposed to have done on the cross?

As it says in 1 Tim 3-6, “This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all. This was the testimony* at the proper time.”

“Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all”, Christ Jesus, the expiator, paying the “ransom”, the expiation, paying it for ALL, the expiation for ALL.

These verses are pretty simple and direct and there are NO “except for’s” that I can see, do you or anyone else see any “except for’s”?

 

[Tom_Baum]

We can debate all we want whether or how many souls are in hell, but the Church does not exist for that purpose. The Church exists to proclaim the Gospel. The Gospel is literally “the good news”. That’s what the word Gospel means.

If “the good news” was not good news for ALL than “the good news” would not be good news at all.

And as Jesus said about HIS CHURCH, “The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against IT”, here is Jesus telling us the whole “mission” of Jesus’s Church.

The “keys” to the “gates of the netherworld” were won by Jesus by His work on the cross in the unfolding of God’s Plan and that is why Jesus was able to say “The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against IT”, because God will use these “keys” in due time, God’s Time.

 

[Tom_Baum]

What is he proposing, then? God wills that everyone be saved, Jesus died to save everyone from sin and from eternal death, which is what sin ultimately leads to. But “The smoke of their torment will ascend day and night for ever and ever”. I’m willing to be enlightened.

When I wrote, “This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all. This was the testimony at the proper time.”, I did not make it up, I copied it from 1 Tim 2: 3-6.

Seems pretty simple and straightforward to me, might not be loaded with details but I would say that the details are God’s business, sometimes we just have to trust that God knows what God is doing, don’t you think?

 

[Achilles6129]

Not according to the Roman Catholic Nicene Creed which says that Jesus is God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God.

Then I would have to disagree. Christ laid aside some of his qualities when he came to earth.

 

[Achilles6129]

I am aware that this individual has been banned but I will respond in case anyone else wants to jump in on the discussion.

Creating only people who would, with their free-will intact, choose him would have been a manifestation that God is good with everyone, all the time, that is, he would have been absolutely good.

Again, why would this be the case? Why do the actions of free creatures affect God’s goodness?

If I give someone a hefty sum of money knowing they will quit their jobs, start using drugs and abusing alcohol, and be a human wreck within a year, if i knew beforehand that the money was going to lead to that deplorable situation, was I good, was I benevolent? My intention might not have been to cause the person harm, but i gave the money (not a bad thing intrinsically) knowing full well the person was going to misuse it. People put limits on what God can or cannot do, could have done etc., there was a way to respect each soul’s free-will yet not bring into the world one who was going to die impenitent.

But would the fact that the person misused that money be your fault, or the person’s fault? They could have spent that money on something good and instead they chose to misuse it. You didn’t control their choice in the slightest - so how would that prove that you’re evil?

The robot argument in reverse. God wants to be loved for who he is, he wants us to choose him over our ego and sin.

“God wants to be loved for who he is?” Where is that ever evident in theology? I would say that it isn’t. I would also say that theology basically proves that God doesn’t need anyone to serve him at all.

The fact that he can only be good, through no conscious decision or effort on his part, he is good the same way a well gives water. There is merit in a man who remains faithfull to his wife when beautiful young women at his job flirt with him, a merit in a man who loves God even though his world may be falling apart, merit in Mother Theresa who served and loved God for 50 years and spent most if not all those years battling depression and doubt etc. God would not create us unable to love him, but he himself is unable to not love us.

There’s nothing here but subjective moral statements, which is really one of the huge problems antitheism faces when attacking theology. Many of their arguments are difficult to formulate because you have to go off of their definitions of goodness or human definitions of goodness.

I don’t really think that a good argument can be formulated saying that it’s wrong for God to be good because he has no choice to be good because any argument is based totally on subjective morality.

The “good things” may refer to what you say they do, but I highly doubt it excludes everything else. God knows we have temporal needs.

The temporal needs would be related to the kingdom of heaven as well.

 

[Cimachol]

If “the good news” was not good news for ALL than “the good news” would not be good news at all.

And as Jesus said about HIS CHURCH, “The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against IT”, here is Jesus telling us the whole “mission” of Jesus’s Church.

The “keys” to the “gates of the netherworld” were won by Jesus by His work on the cross in the unfolding of God’s Plan and that is why Jesus was able to say “The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against IT”, because God will use these “keys” in due time, God’s Time.

I’m not sure what you’re saying at this point. If you are saying that God wants no one to go to Hell, I can agree. If you are saying that salvation was intended for all, I also agree. If you are saying that we can hold onto the hope that somehow everyone has been saved thus far and that all of those who are alive and will live will somehow be saved, I can share that hope with you, however unlikely it may be. If you are saying that Hell is not a very real possibility, I have to disagree.
God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”* (CCC 1037).

But that doesn’t mean that it’s not a possibility:

To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.” (CCC 1033)

 

[Cimachol]

Then I would have to disagree. Christ laid aside some of his qualities when he came to earth.

As I understand it, the Church teaches that Christ’s human knowledge was not infinite, so you would not be in disagreement with us on that point:

Christ’s soul and his human knowledge

471 Apollinarius of Laodicaea asserted that in Christ the divine Word had replaced the soul or spirit. Against this error the Church confessed that the eternal Son also assumed a rational, human soul.100

472 This human soul that the Son of God assumed is endowed with a true human knowledge. As such, this knowledge could not in itself be unlimited: it was exercised in the historical conditions of his existence in space and time.* [Emphasis added]* This is why the Son of God could, when he became man, “increase in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man”,101 and would even have to inquire for himself about what one in the human condition can learn only from experience.102 This corresponded to the reality of his voluntary emptying of himself, taking “the form of a slave”.103

473 But at the same time, this truly human knowledge of God’s Son expressed the divine life of his person.104 "The human nature of God’s Son, not by itself but by its union with the Word, knew and showed forth in itself everything that pertains to God."105 Such is first of all the case with the intimate and immediate knowledge that the Son of God made man has of his Father.106 The Son in his human knowledge also showed the divine penetration he had into the secret thoughts of human hearts.107

474 By its union to the divine wisdom in the person of the Word incarnate, Christ enjoyed in his human knowledge the fullness of understanding of the eternal plans he had come to reveal.108 What he admitted to not knowing in this area, he elsewhere declared himself not sent to reveal.109

 

[catholictiger]

it depends on what the best possible universe means.

It is simple, because God is all good, everything he creates is good and has no evil in it. He brings all things to himself. But what can be done in error is to look at the beginning of creation and say THIS must be perfect, obviously it is not so God must not exist.

To put it logically

God is all good and all powerful
The universe must be all good and have nothing bad in it.
clearly there are things that are bad in the universe
God isn’t all good and all powerful.

The logic of your first post doesn’t really work. All it proves is that God isn’t all good, not that he doesn’t exist.

But there is still a problem with this logic.

First those who argue this way don’t understand final causality.

For example, the fullness of an acorn is realized in it becoming a tree. Even though when it is planted in the ground it hasn’t reached it’s fullness, there is nothing wrong or bad in it. Sure it isn’t a tree, but it is moving towards its end.

We can understand that creation is like a seed. God in a sense, planted a seed that sprouted and is now growing into a plant. That plant is still growing and eventually it will reach it’s potential and bloom a flower. Until that point the plant has not reached it’s end it has not reached it’s perfection.

God didn’t create a universe that is stagnant and perfect from the beginning. Rather he created a universe that has an end, when it reaches that end it will be perfect and all good. Until it reaches that end, it won’t be perfect because perfection is only realized in a things fulfillment, or it’s end.

So let me restructure the argument using this idea of final causality

All things that that have an end, are moving towards that end.
If God creates things with an end than that end will be perfection
It appears that the universe is moving towards an end.
If God created the universe than it is moving towards a perfect end.
All existing things need God to create it.
The universe is an existing thing
Therefore the universe is moving towards a perfect end.

I think that works.

I may have to clean it up later.

 

[Tomdstone]

It is simple, because God is all good, everything he creates is good and has no evil in it.
God is all good and all powerful .

Are you sure that God did not create evil?

 

[tonyrey]

I happen to agree that if God is Omniscient than God knew/knows absolutely everything about everyone that has been or will be created and taking ALL of this into account that God came up with a Plan even before creation for the SALVATION FOR ALL.

“knew” and “before” are inapplicable to God because He transcends time and space. He certainly knows everything that is knowable but the decisions of non-existent persons are not in that category. The only distinction that counts in the spiritual realm is whether we exist or don’t exist. “When” and “where” don’t come into the picture because **we **are created in the image of God. Our bodies began to exist at a precise moment and in a precise place but our souls are not limited by physical factors. We transcend the material world with our power of reason and free will. We are created beyond time and space yet unlike God we are not eternal.

It is difficult for us to grasp the distinction between being created timelessly and **beginning **to exist because we are living in time and space. Yet we know that truth and freedom, justice and love exist independently of when and where our bodies are located. That is why knowledge of an **uncreated **person’s decisions are unknowable.
The very fact that we can defy God and reject His love demonstrates that we have supernatural power which is not scientifically explicable or subject to the laws of nature. So it is not surprising that our decisions are not eternally predictable. Omniscience is inextricably linked with omnipotence. By sharing His power with us God makes Himself vulnerable in more ways than one - in heaven as well as on earth.