Does Christianity have Rational Answers to all Rational Arguments?

  • Thread starter Thread starter icamhif
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
icamhif #17
Except that the innocent had no “free-will” when it comes to natural disasters and cancer.
This comment demonstrates a determination to ridicule reality.

Free-will simply means that we can cooperate with our nature as made by God to do good and avoid evil. Our first parents chose freely, when tempted by Satan, to disobey God’s command – they suffered the consequences which they chose to inflict on themselves and their posterity.

None of us are “innocent” unless we want to deny reality. Futilely railing at God helps no one, especially as we now have all that God gave us thorough His Son redeeming us and providing His Church with Her seven sacraments and infallible doctrine and dogma to enable us to live to the best of our ability and serve Him.

Any assumption that God doesn’t have omniscience is false, as if He didn’t know of the “emergence” of evil.
God knows of everything and that’s why He planned the redemption of mankind by God the Son taking a human nature as Jesus Christ, and enabling the reward of heaven for those who follow His Will.

Adam and Eve disobeyed His order and lost the power over death, wounding human nature and closing off access to heaven, which God repaired by sending His only Son to make amends for this catastrophe and enabled sanctification through His Church, and Purgatory as required, so that amends for sin could be complete and entrance to heaven possible.
 
Are you thinking that we have tsunamis that kill thousands of people including children … because Eve took a bite of fruit?

.
Eve had the opportunity of eternal life, after her sin, she could no longer eat from the tree of life, (immortality) so it means that she would eventually die, and all her children after would also die.

We all die, be it from tsunamis, cancer or a peaceful death in our sleep. Even if we have a pain free life and death, this means very little, if we do not have eternal salvation with our Lord.

If I killed someone here on Earth, God can restore them to a greater good life after death, then I would have to face God with fear and trembling, The greater question is how much does God forgive?
 
Are you thinking that we have tsunamis that kill thousands of people including children … because Eve took a bite of fruit?

.
No,the eating of the fruit is an allegory. Our first parents decided to circumvent the natural limits God required and suffered the consequences. The fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was forbidden for a reason.

The rain falls on the just and the unjust alike. Disasters happen and so does suffering.It is all part of the human condition and a fallen world.
 
The problem with the “greater purpose” argument, as I see it, is that it does not explain how the end justifies the means. It does not explain how the glory that is to come outweighs all the natural disasters, diseases, famine, etc., that has ruined so many innocent lives (yes, we are all sinners, but I’m sure you know what I mean, humanly speaking, when I say “innocent.”) From a purely rational and humanistic perspective, it just seems like a cop-out. .
It is not a case of “the end justifies the means.” Such a case would be doing something morally evil in order that good may come out of it. For example: conducting harmful or forced human experimentation to discover a cure for a disease.

In the case of God, he allows the evil effects of his creatures’ evil actions to take effect. The moral source of the evil is the creature and not God. He does not intervene so as to prevent or nullify these ill effects but rather intervenes so that an even greater good may come out of them.

I think apart from the glorification of the elect, he makes the ill effects of sin apparent to all also to let us grasp how evil sin is. Maybe this is meant by the tree of “knowledge of good and evil.” It doesn’t just mean mental knowledge but also an actual experience of both good and evil with all their effects.

One might argue that why doesn’t he just prevent his creatures from committing evil. But this would be contrary to our having free will.

Addendum:
According to Bible, the glory of the kingdom of God does far outweigh all the evil that has taken place. It is beyond our imagination (1 Cor 2:9). It is so good in fact that all tears will be wiped away as though everything bad will be but a thing of the past. (Rev 21:4)

“For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all.” - 2 Cor 4:17
 
It is not a case of “the end justifies the means.” Such a case would be doing something morally evil in order that good may come out of it. For example: conducting harmful or forced human experimentation to discover a cure for a disease.

In the case of God, he allows the evil effects of his creatures’ evil actions to take effect. The moral source of the evil is the creature and not God. He does not intervene so as to prevent or nullify these ill effects but rather intervenes so that an even greater good may come out of them.

I think apart from the glorification of the elect, he makes the ill effects of sin apparent to all also to let us grasp how evil sin is. Maybe this is meant by the tree of “knowledge of good and evil.” It doesn’t just mean mental knowledge but also an actual experience of both good and evil with all their effects.

One might argue that why doesn’t he just prevent his creatures from committing evil. But this would be contrary to our having free will.

Addendum:
According to Bible, the glory of the kingdom of God does far outweigh all the evil that has taken place. It is beyond our imagination (1 Cor 2:9). It is so good in fact that all tears will be wiped away as though everything bad will be but a thing of the past. (Rev 21:4)

“For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all.” - 2 Cor 4:17
I see the distinction between causing evil and allowing evil, but as far as “end justifying the mean” is concerned, I think that is a distinction without a difference. The fact that I only allow it does not change the fact that I’m using it for some purpose.

I’m not so much in cognitive dissonance about evil as I am about suffering, such as cancer and earthquakes. Even if we will, for all of eternity, be thankful to God for showing us how evil sin is and for freeing us from the consequences of sin, it still doesn’t make sense to me how that justifies the thousands of years of billions of people suffering from disease and natural disasters. (And the original sin argument only makes me cringe with a “Wow, billions have to suffer for the mistake of two? What kind of justice is this?”)

That said, I will stay faithful to God and trust that He will reveal the answers to me, whether in this life or the next life.
 
(And the original sin argument only makes me cringe with a “Wow, billions have to suffer for the mistake of two? What kind of justice is this?”)

.
As Oscar Wild said, ‘I can resist everything, except temptation.’

Adam and Eve, only had one command to obey, and death would be the punishment for disobedience. I am sure I would have done the same as them, I would have to find out for myself. I know how I disobeyed my parents when I was growing up, I now know their advice was sound. I watched my children and grandchildren grow up, they are also making their own mistakes, despite being given sound advice.

I think we all add a little bit to the injustice in the world, we are all guilty. We are often reminded; that we allow twenty seven thousand children to starve to death every day.

God must weep, when he sees our injustice to each other.
 
I see the distinction between causing evil and allowing evil, but as far as “end justifying the mean” is concerned, I think that is a distinction without a difference. The fact that I only allow it does not change the fact that I’m using it for some purpose.

.
Just imagine if God created the universe and life with just one purpose, that he would love each and everyone of us as he loves himself.

We are created in the image of God, do the greatest commandments have a greatest meaning for God our Father?
 
I see the distinction between causing evil and allowing evil, but as far as “end justifying the mean” is concerned, I think that is a distinction without a difference. The fact that I only allow it does not change the fact that I’m using it for some purpose.

I’m not so much in cognitive dissonance about evil as I am about suffering, such as cancer and earthquakes. Even if we will, for all of eternity, be thankful to God for showing us how evil sin is and for freeing us from the consequences of sin, it still doesn’t make sense to me how that justifies the thousands of years of billions of people suffering from disease and natural disasters. (And the original sin argument only makes me cringe with a “Wow, billions have to suffer for the mistake of two? What kind of justice is this?”)

That said, I will stay faithful to God and trust that He will reveal the answers to me, whether in this life or the next life.
Since God is infinitely just and is perfectly just, we cannot entertain for a minute that the billions of people who may have suffered from disease or natural disasters throughout the history of the world is somehow unjust in the sight of God even though we may not understand it. Since you want to remain faithful to God than I think you would agree to this even though we may not comprehend it.

At the same time, I don’t think we can say that the thousands of years of billions of people suffering from disease and natural disasters is solely from the mistake of two, namely, Adam and Eve although we are all born with original sin on our souls and the consequences of it. As St John says “If we say, “We are without sin,” we deceive ourselves,* and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). Who of us can say that we are innocent and guiltless in the sight of God? So, from the billions of people suffering from disease and natural disasters we have billions of sins crying out for justice before God. If the two sins of the first couple of the human race dealt such a blow to humanity and harmony with God and creation, what must the billions of sins of billions of people do for humanity and our harmony with God and creation? Probably, in strict justice, God should annihilate the world and everything in it as what happened in the Flood except that a few were saved. But God’s infinite justice is balanced by His infinite mercy, compassion, and forgiveness. The sufferings we undergo we deserve because of our sins, this is justice, but we do not suffer as much as our sins deserve as it is written “He has not dealt with us as our sins merit, nor requited us as our wrongs deserve.” (Psalm 103:10). Actually, according to divine revelation, it is only Jesus Christ, the God-Man, our savior and redeemer, who was able to pay to God the debt we owned him as he took upon himself the sins of all humanity and paid an infinite price to God.

If we read about the lives of the saints, their sufferings were joy to them. St Teresa of Avila said “to suffer and not to die.” Jesus Christ has made suffering and trials redemptive and for the saints, far from trying to escape the cross of Christ, they embraced it with love for their own salvation and the salvation of souls as Jesus embraced his own cross. The point here is that we should not have such a negative view of suffering and trials, but rather consider that this is our path to heaven and a mark of christian discipleship. The saints say that a person who is without trials and crosses is probably on a path of eternal damnation. The saints also rejoiced in their sufferings and trails because as justice is a virtue, it is an act of virtue to make satisfaction for our sins. Penance is a virtue, it is a good act.
 
I see the distinction between causing evil and allowing evil, but as far as “end justifying the mean” is concerned, I think that is a distinction without a difference. The fact that I only allow it does not change the fact that I’m using it for some purpose.
The difference is substantial. God is not the one who erred but rather he transformed the ill effects of the error into something which is incomparably better. It’s like God giving a person a gift. This person takes the gift, misuses and destroys it, and throws the trash on the road. Then, God steps in to recycle that trash and transforms it into a better product and gift.

In no way did God commit any wrong here. All he did was good and even the evil we caused, he transformed into something better. Neither did he desire that his gift be misused for wrongdoing.

This is what happened to Jesus. God gave men freedom. Men abused their freedom to commit evil, even to the point of killing the Son of God. Yet God stepped in to make Christ’s sacrifice a source of salvation for all mankind. That is why the Church sings: “O happy fault that earned for us so great, so glorious a Redeemer.”
I’m not so much in cognitive dissonance about evil as I am about suffering, such as cancer and earthquakes. Even if we will, for all of eternity, be thankful to God for showing us how evil sin is and for freeing us from the consequences of sin, it still doesn’t make sense to me how that justifies the thousands of years of billions of people suffering from disease and natural disasters. (And the original sin argument only makes me cringe with a “Wow, billions have to suffer for the mistake of two? What kind of justice is this?”)
There is no need to justify these sufferings because they are in fact the very effects of the moral evil that men committed. If they seem so gruesome to you (and you are right!), the moral evil done from whence it came is even so much worse in reality. The effects we observe now are even mitigated by God’s mercy. “He has not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.” (Psalm 103:10)

Adam and Eve were created in a preternatural state, with the benefits of a perfect intellect and will. God has given them all the pleasant blessings in life. Yet they still dared to offend God, who has been but all -good to them. Consider, too, that the dignity of God is infinite. If one’s punishment is proportional to the dignity of the one offended, you can imagine why hell exists.

And the story of sin is repeated again and again in our personal lives.

But thanks be to God that he still redeemed us in his compassion!
That said, I will stay faithful to God and trust that He will reveal the answers to me, whether in this life or the next life.
👍
 
If I take the insights of every Saint, every Theologian, every Apologist, and otherwise every rational thinker in the world, will I have all the answers that should satisfy the skepticism of all honest people?
For some, for example those that honestly believe that The Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon, will not believe anything that a Catholic says. I don’t think there exists any explanations that will overcome their invincible denial of every thing The Catholic Church or it’s members say.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top