Does the Catholic concept of God devolve a lot of power away from him?

[Prodigal_Son1]

In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, God issued and carried out judgment directly. In the case of the Canaanites, God may have ordered it, but man carried it out.

Could this event happen today and receive the Church’s stamp of approval? I don’t see how, as this type of slaughter, notably against children, is prohibited in every way, shape, and form. In the context of the OP, how is this not devolving God’s power.

BTW, how do we know that Stalin’s killing wasn’t part of God’s plan? My answer: We don’t know.

The intentional targeting of non-combatants is against Church doctrine and will not change. Again, God delegated His authoritative Church and made promises in guiding, and being with, the Church until the consummation of the world. Through His guidance, from His heavenly throne, He is in full power as the head of the Church.

No one knows the mind of God, yet the prophets communicated what was from God and what wasn’t in Old Testament times. We have no such prophets since the institution of the new and everlasting covenant. Could any death be according to God’s plan? Yes, and as Christians we pray His will be done, not ours.

Your missing my point, and the point of the OP. Explain to me what the criteria is for justifying the slaughter of young children and babies in context of Church law. All I can find is absolute prohibitions. It is obviously allowed in certain circumstances if the Bible is to be believed, yet the Church outright prohibits it.

I suspect a lot of people don’t see the conflict because they don’t want to see it. Once people stop seeing these types of things, their search for the Truth stops also.

There is no justifying the slaughter of young children and babies in context of Church law.

Heb 8:6 But now he hath obtained a better ministry, by how much also he is a mediator of a better testament which is established on better promises.
Heb 8:7 For if that former had been faultless, there should not indeed a place have been sought for a second.
Heb 8:8 For, finding fault with them, he saith: Behold the days shall come, saith the Lord: and I will perfect, unto the house of Israel and unto the house of Juda, a new testament:
Heb 8:9 Not according to the testament which I made to their fathers, on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt: because they continued not in my testament: and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
Heb 8:10 For this is the testament which I will make to the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord: I will give my laws into their mind: and in their heart will I write them. And I will be their God: and they shall be my people.
Heb 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother, saying: Know the Lord. For all shall know me, from the least to the greatest of them.
Heb 8:12 Because I will be merciful to their iniquities: and their sins I will remember no more.
Heb 8:13 Now in saying a new, he hath made the former old. And that which decayeth and groweth old is near its end.

Paul is quoting Old Testament prophecy.

There was no conflict. There was a new and everlasting covenant, between God and man. People seek to find conflict to ‘devolve God’s power’, possibly as a justification of their own understandings, beliefs or desires even, in my honest opinion. No one can know all of God’s will, even though in challenging the knowledge we have some people are assuming that knowledge, again for their own purposes it seems.

 

[You]

You’re starting to see my point. There is a difference between God killing and Stalin killing.

In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, God issued and carried out judgment directly. In the case of the Canaanites, God may have ordered it, but man carried it out.

Could this event happen today and receive the Church’s stamp of approval? I don’t see how, as this type of slaughter, notably against children, is prohibited in every way, shape, and form. In the context of the OP, how is this not devolving God’s power.

You are labouring over nothing. Why not take the example of the greatest slaughter in history when every living thing with breath in its nostrils was killed by God save Noah and all in his boat.
What did God promise after this slaughter? Never again will He kill like this.
Similarly the Church He founded and the one which He breathed His living Holy Spirit into to guide it has not these elements in it. This Church is Christ’s own body, far from devolving power it speaks what it hears from God, and like the flood of Noah which will not be visited on humanity again then neither will the slaughter of innocents.

BTW, how do we know that Stalin’s killing wasn’t part of God’s plan? My answer: We don’t know.

Your missing my point, and the point of the OP. Explain to me what the criteria is for justifying the slaughter of young children and babies in context of Church law. All I can find is absolute prohibitions. It is obviously allowed in certain circumstances if the Bible is to be believed, yet the Church outright prohibits it.

I suspect a lot of people don’t see the conflict because they don’t want to see it. Once people stop seeing these types of things, their search for the Truth stops also.

As God said, He will never slaughter everything again in a global flood so the Church He charged to speak for Him, ‘he who hears you, hears Me’, does not allow for any slaughter again by Gods people.

 

[Dymphna82]

I think that if God told the Pope to slaughter children of a particular country, it would be the Pope’s job to command it. It wouldn’t change our views on murder for everyone else, it would be a decree, to be carried out for this one thing.

That said, I greatly doubt God would ask for such a thing in this day and age. We have too many opponents that would use such an act to try and get people to leave the Church.

 

[Warrior1979]

You are labouring over nothing. Why not take the example of the greatest slaughter in history when every living thing with breath in its nostrils was killed by God save Noah and all in his boat.
What did God promise after this slaughter? Never again will He kill like this.

You still don’t see the difference, which is relevant. With regard to The Flood, it is the direct action of God, not man, that caused physical death.

In Sodom & Gomarrah, it is the direct action of God, not man, that caused physical death.

In the case of the Canaanites, it is man that wielded the sword and caused the physical death, not God.

 

[Warrior1979]

I think that if God told the Pope to slaughter children of a particular country, it would be the Pope’s job to command it.

Obviously God is free to do what He wishes, and what He has done before He may do again. Your comment is one way it can be done. However, since infallible dogma prohibits it, there is an obvious problem. In the context of the OP, one manner of viewing this is devolving power.

 

[Godfollower]

You still don’t see the difference, which is relevant. With regard to The Flood, it is the direct action of God, not man, that caused physical death.

In Sodom & Gomarrah, it is the direct action of God, not man, that caused physical death.

In the case of the Canaanites, it is man that wielded the sword and caused the physical death, not God.

You still haven’t explained how it is that you think God is bound by His Church, or why His Commands in the Old Testament have to be exactly the same as His Commands in the New Testament.

The Old Testament allowed divorce. The New Testament does not. Both are commands issued directly by God and recorded in Holy Scripture. Does your argument mean that God changed?

The Fifth Commandment prohibits murder, not killing. As I’m sure we all agree, one may kill if necessary in self-defense or in defense of others. Catholic theology, however, also permits killing when justified by other circumstances. The Just War doctrine is one such example; so is execution by the state under certain circumstances.

God can command whatever He wants. If God commands the killing of an entire nation, that is a divine execution, however He chooses to carry out His will. He may use His creation however He wishes: He may send a flood, cause an earthquake, or smite a city with a meteor if He so wishes.

Or He may send in an army of His chosen people to carry out His command. No matter how He does it, He is using His creation to do His will.

But the killing cannot be considered sinful – under Old Testament law or under New Testament law – because sin is by definition turning away from God. Obeying His commands is the very antithesis of sin.

 

[Godfollower]

Obviously God is free to do what He wishes, and what He has done before He may do again. Your comment is one way it can be done. However, since infallible dogma prohibits it, there is an obvious problem. In the context of the OP, one manner of viewing this is devolving power.

Well, no. Again, you are misunderstanding Catholic theology. The problem with your analysis is that you are confusing divine acts and human acts. Catholic theology speaks of the morality of human acts. “Human acts, that is, acts that are freely chosen in consequence of a judgment of conscience, can be morally evaluated. They are either good or evil.” Catechism ¶ 1749.

When God issues a direct command to humans to perform a certain act, that act becomes a divine act. We are obeying His command, and the moral responsibility for that act lies with Him. God is capable of understanding His actions far more than we are. God is good; you simply have to trust that, whatever He is commanding you to do, He is acting in a good way.

Abraham’s trust in God with respect to offering up his son to God is an example of such trust. Abraham had been raised to believe that killing his own son was wrong. But he trusted in God. That’s our job.

But it is not our place to question the morality of God’s commands.

 

[You]

You still don’t see the difference, which is relevant. With regard to The Flood, it is the direct action of God, not man, that caused physical death.

In Sodom & Gomarrah, it is the direct action of God, not man, that caused physical death.

In the case of the Canaanites, it is man that wielded the sword and caused the physical death, not God.

Two types of men wielded the sword back in those days; there were the people acting against Gods command and there were the people acting out Gods command.

 

[tonyrey]

I think that if God told the Pope to slaughter children of a particular country, it would be the Pope’s job to command it. It wouldn’t change our views on murder for everyone else, it would be a decree, to be carried out for this one thing.

That said, I greatly doubt God would ask for such a thing in this day and age. We have too many opponents that would use such an act to try and get people to leave the Church.

What possible justification could there be for such an atrocity? It would be more in keeping with a command by the Devil!

 

[tonyrey]

When God issues a direct command to humans to perform a certain act, that act becomes a divine act.

God would never command us to hate, steal, kill and commit adultery because such actions are opposed to loving our neighbour…

 

[tonyrey]

Two types of men wielded the sword back in those days; there were the people acting against Gods command and there were the people acting out Gods command.

You mean those who believed they were commanded to do so…

 

[tonyrey]

God can command whatever He wants. If God commands the killing of an entire nation, that is a divine execution, however He chooses to carry out His will. He may use His creation however He wishes: He may send a flood, cause an earthquake, or smite a city with a meteor if He so wishes.

Only a diabolical monster would command the killing of an entire nation in which there are innocent children…

 

[tonyrey]

You still don’t see the difference, which is relevant. With regard to The Flood, it is the direct action of God, not man, that caused physical death.

 

[You]

You mean those who believed they were commanded to do so…

Thats an important point.

 

[You]

The Flood had natural causes like earthquakes and tsunamis…

The Sodom and Gomorrah legend may well have been caused by a massive meteor which exploded near the region in 3123 B.C.

The Creator is not the Destroyer!

Natural lumps of pitch are gathered from a lake thereabouts. Pitch is highly flammable.

 

[tonyrey]

Natural lumps of pitch are gathered from a lake thereabouts. Pitch is highly flammable.

So?

 

[tonyrey]

Thats an important point.

And they were misguided!

 

[Warrior1979]

You still haven’t explained how it is that you think God is bound by His Church, or why His Commands in the Old Testament have to be exactly the same as His Commands in the New Testament.

I’m not concerned about God’s commands, but rather man’s actions.

The Old Testament allowed divorce. The New Testament does not. Both are commands issued directly by God and recorded in Holy Scripture. Does your argument mean that God changed?

This was not a “command” by God, but rather a precept by Moses. This is clearly explained by Christ.

The Fifth Commandment prohibits murder, not killing. As I’m sure we all agree, one may kill if necessary in self-defense or in defense of others. Catholic theology, however, also permits killing when justified by other circumstances. The Just War doctrine is one such example; so is execution by the state under certain circumstances.

Nobody as of yet has explained how directly targeting children and babies is not murder; i.e., justified killing.

God can command whatever He wants. If God commands the killing of an entire nation, that is a divine execution, however He chooses to carry out His will. He may use His creation however He wishes: He may send a flood, cause an earthquake, or smite a city with a meteor if He so wishes.

This is true, but God is not generally in the habit of commanding man to break His Commandments. Sending floods, causing earthquakes, parting the Red Sea, destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, etc. are all direct actions by God. Man has nothing to do with the execution of these actions. In the case of the Canaanite slaughter, it is man that actually executes the plan. Once man is used for the action, it creates problem with infallible dogma. Objectively the slaughter of Canaanite children at the hand’s of man is murder; in the hands of God it is not.

Because of the manner that “infallible” is defined, it states assertively, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the action was murder. However, it is not, since it was commanded by God. It is a clear conflict.

 

[You]

So?

Fire raining from the sky? ‘brimstone and fire’, pitch contains sulphur (brimstone) and it burns, burns, burns.

 

[tonyrey]

Fire raining from the sky? ‘brimstone and fire’, pitch contains sulphur (brimstone) and it burns, burns, burns.

No doubt but only fundamentalists interpret everything in the Old Testament literally.