Evil vs. Absence of Good

[oldcelt]

Since this a philosophy forum, and I wouldn’t want your peers to tear you to shreds I offer this:
There is a difference between Being and Becoming. I t is held and proven that we are Becoming in our nature If being was our nature we would be all that we could be at one time This is contrary to our human experience the criterion of our knowledge
We humans exhibit a constant change in our nature. A movement from a real capacity to become to an actual becoming. Philosophers refer to this as Potency and Act. this act is not pure act because it is manifested through a series of changes in time mode. If it was Pure Act there would be no change.and no time but eternity. Since we didn’t cause our own existence, and couldn’t and because the movement from potency to act requires a prime mover logic necessitates that this prime mover is God. The source of activity to bring life to the body is called soul, the source of immanent activity that bring the body to maturity, fulfillling the real capacity of the body to become a mature adult to the actual maturity of adulthood, and that too is always changing.

Since we can not bring ourself into existence some being is necessary to give us existence.this Being must be subsistent That someone is God and we are completely dependent on Him for our existence , He not only gave us existence but sustains our existence always,We are not subsistent, but totally dependent and He is the Prime Cause of it,and of any change our nature exhibits. So when you say that God created us and left us to fend for ourselves and has no interest in our lives, you are definitely wrong in you judgement philosophically We are constantly being created, becoming., Gods’ acts are eternal It impossible for us to exist continually, or to do anything without Him, He is always with us, but it can be said that we are not always with Him spiritually.

Since I am not concerned about my peers “tearing me to Shreds,” and you didn’t anser anything that was asked, let’s look at your last paragraph. On PRECISELY what do you base any of what you claim in that paragraph?
Next, I do not believe that God created me, my parents did that. The universe was begun by God and allowed to evolve on its own. Humans are part of that process, not direct creation IMHO. We are also quite capable of sustaining our existence, at least to this point in time…observation shows that. How is that wrong philosophically? Maybe it is just opposed to your philosophy. If that is the case, you are equating your belief (Faith) with fact…something none of us can do.

 

[ynotzap]

To believe in a god who is indifferent to the pains and sufferings of his creation is to believe in a limited god, one that lacks love, goodness and compassion, is imperfect and lacks total being. This god could not be God at all. This concept borders on atheism You said your parents created you which implies that they gave you life. I assume they are deceased (God Bless Them) If they gave you life, they must have it to give, an if they had it they wouldn’t have ceased to live. They would be subsistant. this is were your logic leads. I already established that human experience the criterion of our knowledge shows that we are indeed completely dependent on things outside ourselves to exist, even to know. And what or who are we ultimately dependent upon? If I follow the phenomenon found in our existence called cause and effect and say that your parents were caused by their parents, and their parents were caused etc, etc. Then we should come to the first parents as being the primal cause. If they didn’t have a cause, then they could be called, the primal cause of your existence. They would have to be subsistent, existing forever, not dependent on anyone or anything. That means their nature would have to be existence and if that were the case they would still be alive. We see the fallacy of this logic Supposing the first parents were subsistent and they caused creation of every parent down the line of cause and effect, then all those parents would have received the subsistence of the first parents, the capability of the first parents. This then would be Pantheism, all are gods This again is erroneous logic.

Your answer to all of this: Deism is what I believe, it’s my belief system, you take what you say from your belief system. I take my reasoning from the persuit of knowledge from human experience and logic. I take all of my experience and belief from God, manifested in Jesus Christ who confirms my faith and logic.( and the Catholic Church His Kingdom is my guide, not my fallible reason. As I see it you are in great need to have an encounter with Jesus Christ, and if you deny yourself that blessing He is willing to give, because He is love, then you are really on your own, and alone.

 

[tonyrey]

To believe in a god who is indifferent to the pains and sufferings of his creation is to believe in a limited god, one that lacks love, goodness and compassion, is imperfect and lacks total being. This god could not be God at all. This concept borders on atheism You said your parents created you which implies that they gave you life. I assume they are deceased (God Bless Them) If they gave you life, they must have it to give, an if they had it they wouldn’t have ceased to live. They would be subsistant. this is were your logic leads. I already established that human experience the criterion of our knowledge shows that we are indeed completely dependent on things outside ourselves to exist, even to know. And what or who are we ultimately dependent upon? If I follow the phenomenon found in our existence called cause and effect and say that your parents were caused by their parents, and their parents were caused etc, etc. Then we should come to the first parents as being the primal cause. If they didn’t have a cause, then they could be called, the primal cause of your existence. They would have to be subsistent, existing forever, not dependent on anyone or anything. That means their nature would have to be existence and if that were the case they would still be alive. We see the fallacy of this logic Supposing the first parents were subsistent and they caused creation of every parent down the line of cause and effect, then all those parents would have received the subsistence of the first parents, the capability of the first parents. This then would be Pantheism, all are gods This again is erroneous logic.

Your answer to all of this: Deism is what I believe, it’s my belief system, you take what you say from your belief system. I take my reasoning from the persuit of knowledge from human experience and logic. I take all of my experience and belief from God, manifested in Jesus Christ who confirms my faith and logic.( and the Catholic Church His Kingdom is my guide, not my fallible reason. As I see it you are in great need to have an encounter with Jesus Christ, and if you deny yourself that blessing He is willing to give, because He is love, then you are really on your own, and alone.

:clapping: You have well and truly zapped the enemy’s artillery!

 

[tonyrey]

Next, I do not believe that God created me, my parents did that. The universe was begun by God and allowed to evolve on its own. Humans are part of that process, not direct creation IMHO. We are also quite capable of sustaining our existence, at least to this point in time…observation shows that. How is that wrong philosophically? Maybe it is just opposed to your philosophy. If that is the case, you are equating your belief (Faith) with fact…something none of us can do.

Do you believe our souls have emerged from molecules? For no reason?

If so the notion of God diminishes to vanishing point! After all, “By their fruits you shall know them”.

As Lear said, “Nothing shall come of nothing”. If God does nothing there is no reason for Him - or anything else - to exist. :dts: Your descent on the slippery slope from Christianity hasn’t ended yet. Let’s hope it changes direction…

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Tony,

The Deist position is not very far removed from the Buddhist position as I see it. According to our resident Buddhist rossum, the gods do exist but they are ineffectual and can be safely ignored. I think that is what old celt really believes. The gods (or the Deity) can be safely ignored because they are not even concerned (and may not even be aware of) and certainly have no purposeful use for us, so we can just as safely dismiss them (the Deity anyway) as the Deity has dismissed us.

The problem with this philosophy is that it has no proof nor rational basis for it.

It simply does not make sense that God would go to the trouble of creating a vast universe and then turn his back on it as if it did not even exist, or as if he could care less if it did exist. This philosophy also presumes to have a window into the mind of the Deity, yet there is nowhere that this window can be proven to exist … not through reason and certainly not through revelation. There is no Bible the Deists can consult. No authority but their own say so, which is hardly to be taken as definitive.

 

[oldcelt]

Do you believe our souls have emerged from molecules? For no reason?

If so the notion of God diminishes to vanishing point! After all, “By their fruits you shall know them”.

As Lear said, “Nothing shall come of nothing”. If God does nothing there is no reason for Him - or anything else - to exist. :dts: Your descent on the slippery slope from Christianity hasn’t ended yet. Let’s hope it changes direction…

God is the great creator. Much as one of us might take joy in their wood-shop, or painting, pottery, writing and so on.

What I once called a soul, I would now relate more to our higher consciousness ans self-awareness. God has no need of our worship or praise…He is God. Ge got along without us for billions of years and I can’t envision how He needs us now.

If you’ve noticed, I’ve been kind of quiet. The reason is simple.; there isn’t much to say about Deism and I do not want to get into fights with those who equate faith with fact. Nor do I want to seem as if I am recruiting.
I personally thank God for having begun the universe and then leaving it and us to our own means. (My personal belief only)
I thank you, Tony, for what I view as sincere concern.

 

[oldcelt]

Tony,

The Deist position is not very far removed from the Buddhist position as I see it. According to our resident Buddhist rossum, the gods do exist but they are ineffectual and can be safely ignored. I think that is what old celt really believes. The gods (or the Deity) can be safely ignored because they are not even concerned (and may not even be aware of) and certainly have no purposeful use for us, so we can just as safely dismiss them (the Deity anyway) as the Deity has dismissed us.

The problem with this philosophy is that it has no proof nor rational basis for it.

It simply does not make sense that God would go to the trouble of creating a vast universe and then turn his back on it as if it did not even exist, or as if he could care less if it did exist. This philosophy also presumes to have a window into the mind of the Deity, yet there is nowhere that this window can be proven to exist … not through reason and certainly not through revelation. There is no Bible the Deists can consult. No authority but their own say so, which is hardly to be taken as definitive.

I see a great difference between not interfering in the affairs of sentient beings and indifference. I believe that God observes and is a developing intelligence…please note the “I believe.”
I have no proof for my beliefs, but that puts me in good company. So far as rational basis and belief in an unseen force, I don’t think anyone can claim that.

 

[tonyrey]

Do you believe our souls have emerged from molecules? For no reason?

In other words the Supreme Egoist!

What I once called a soul, I would now relate more to our higher consciousness ans self-awareness. God has no need of our worship or praise…He is God. He got along without us for billions of years and I can’t envision how He needs us now.

Your priorities are misguided. God doesn’t need us but we need God.

If you’ve noticed, I’ve been kind of quiet. The reason is simple.; there isn’t much to say about Deism and I do not want to get into fights with those who equate faith with fact. Nor do I want to seem as if I am recruiting.
I personally thank God for having begun the universe and then leaving it and us to our own means. (My personal belief only)
I thank you, Tony, for what I view as sincere concern.

It’s not a fight or a question of faith but plain logic. You thank God for creating the universe and leaving us to our own devices yet you believe He cannot be good because He permits so much suffering in the world.

Why do you think Christ was crucified?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

If you’ve noticed, I’ve been kind of quiet. The reason is simple.; there isn’t much to say about Deism …

I agree with this. Deism is relatively empty of content. Yet it asserts a belief without any authority for that belief but one’s own insight. And those insights, as you’ve just said, aren’t much.

I can’t wrap my head around the notion that, having created us, God is indifferent to our fate.

The notion makes God a contemptible entity, far more so than the farmer (if you can find one such) who throws seed upon the earth and takes no further interest in farming.

 

[ynotzap]

Oldcelt I know you don’t believe in the Catholic Church as you belief system, but if you would allow me to present a passage from Scripture. St. Paul to the Romans: l;l9-20 For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what He has made. As a result they have no excuse. I have found this to be true rationally, and so have many others. We can only witness to what we know. We have free will to accept or reject. I personally know Faith in Christ and His Church is a gift, and it would be unfair to demand from a person what he can not give. There is another belief that we have. It states that no one can come to Christ unless the Father calls him, and no one can go to the Father except through Christ. WE pray that the Father calls you.

A thought has been running through my mind, Were you in Ireland during the fighting going on between the Catholics and the Protestants. If so I can understand your feeling and even some of your thoughts about mans’ inhumanity to man, all in the name of God. Scandal is so distructive, but inevitable knowing weak and fallible human nature no matter what faith. Same with the Muslims and so many others.

 

[oldcelt]

Oldcelt I know you don’t believe in the Catholic Church as you belief system, but if you would allow me to present a passage from Scripture. St. Paul to the Romans: l;l9-20 For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what He has made. As a result they have no excuse. I have found this to be true rationally, and so have many others. We can only witness to what we know. We have free will to accept or reject. I personally know Faith in Christ and His Church is a gift, and it would be unfair to demand from a person what he can not give. There is another belief that we have. It states that no one can come to Christ unless the Father calls him, and no one can go to the Father except through Christ. WE pray that the Father calls you.

A thought has been running through my mind, Were you in Ireland during the fighting going on between the Catholics and the Protestants. If so I can understand your feeling and even some of your thoughts about mans’ inhumanity to man, all in the name of God. Scandal is so distructive, but inevitable knowing weak and fallible human nature no matter what faith. Same with the Muslims and so many others.

Thanks for taking the time for your insight, ynotzap. While it is obvious that I have a much darker view of the Judeo-Christian God, that does not necessarily extend to those who believe in Him. I was not personally in Ireland during “the Troubles,” but knew and supported several who were active in the cause. A few were jailed by British authorities and several of those now live near Syracuse, NY.

There are those who say that the strife is no longer a religious issue. Welllll…that’s a tough one when religion and politics intertwine as they have. I hope for the day when Ireland is one.

 

[oldcelt]

I agree with this. Deism is relatively empty of content. Yet it asserts a belief without any authority for that belief but one’s own insight. And those insights, as you’ve just said, aren’t much.

I** can’t wrap my head around the notion that, having created us, God is indifferent to our fate.

The notion makes God a contemptible entity, far more so than the farmer (if you can find one such) who throws seed upon the earth and takes no further interest in farming.**

I understand your viewpoint, but obviously disagree. I can’t rationalize a God who knowingly creates sentient entities that are bound for a horrid end, or one that slaughters entire groups, including their children. Or someone whose free will God already knows will result in condemnation.

Deism is God at his simplest and, perhaps, most loving. He initiated creation, and when we evolved and gained consciousness, He did not interfere out of some, to me, odd need to be loved after having existed alone for billions of years. Why did He suddenly become lonely and feeling unloved?

 

[oldcelt]

It’s not a fight or a question of faith but plain logic. You thank God for creating the universe and leaving us to our own devices yet you believe He cannot be good because He permits so much suffering in the world.

Why do you think Christ was crucified?

As a Deist I do believe that my version of God is good. He has nothing to do with suffering, wars, etc. That’s the Judeo-Christian God. My God may not even know that I exist, though I kind of hope he does.

Christ was crucified for declaring himself king.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . Christ was crucified for declaring himself king.

This is a very interesting comment, contrasted with the depth of meaning that surrounds the transcendent symbol of the cross: Christ - alone, in pain, ridiculed, having everything, even His very life taken from Him - in that act, taking up the suffering of all humanity, paying the price for our salvation, and forgiving us of our sins. With the resurrection, death and evil are conquered; re-established is that most joyous and holy of relationships, union in the infinite love of and for our Creator. All that is of ultimate value, all that has any meaning, beauty, and truth is centered on the love expressed by Christ.

A story of some prophet, a carpenters son who ran afoul of the authorities, replaces the splendor, the glory of Reality itself, emerging from eternity and spreading to include all time.

How can one’s soul not cry out for more truth, more beauty, more love, more life? People are willing to settle for so little.

 

[tonyrey]

This is a very interesting comment, contrasted with the depth of meaning that surrounds the transcendent symbol of the cross: Christ - alone, in pain, ridiculed, having everything, even His very life taken from Him - in that act, taking up the suffering of all humanity, paying the price for our salvation, and forgiving us of our sins. With the resurrection, death and evil are conquered; re-established is that most joyous and holy of relationships, union in the infinite love of and for our Creator. All that is of ultimate value, all that has any meaning, beauty, and truth is centered on the love expressed by Christ.

A story of some prophet, a carpenters son who ran afoul of the authorities, replaces the splendor, the glory of Reality itself, emerging from eternity and spreading to include all time.

How can one’s soul not cry out for more truth, more beauty, more love, more life? People are willing to settle for so little.

:clapping:

We all get what we deserve…

 

[tonyrey]

I understand your viewpoint, but obviously disagree. I can’t rationalize a God who knowingly creates sentient entities that are bound for a horrid end, or one that slaughters entire groups, including their children.

No one is “bound for a horrid end”. We get what we deserve…

Or someone whose free will God already knows will result in condemnation.

The decisions of a non-existent person are unknowable.

Deism is God at his simplest and, perhaps, most loving.

Deism is the apotheosis of egoism.

He initiated creation, and when we evolved and gained consciousness, He did not interfere out of some, to me, odd need to be loved after having existed alone for billions of years.

God is Love!

Why did He suddenly become lonely and feeling unloved?

A projection of a human defect…

 

[tonyrey]

As a Deist I do believe that my version of God is good. He has nothing to do with suffering, wars, etc. That’s the Judeo-Christian God. My God may not even know that I exist, though I kind of hope he does.

Your version of God is the deification of selfishness…

Christ was crucified for declaring himself king.

Indeed:

36 Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.”

37 Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”

John 18:36-37

 

[tonyrey]

I agree with this. Deism is relatively empty of content. Yet it asserts a belief without any authority for that belief but one’s own insight. And those insights, as you’ve just said, aren’t much.

I can’t wrap my head around the notion that, having created us, God is indifferent to our fate.

The notion makes God a contemptible entity, far more so than the farmer (if you can find one such) who throws seed upon the earth and takes no further interest in farming.

A despicable deity…

 

[ynotzap]

Oldcelt: I like everyone else experienced some great trials in our life I looked around through life and saw others much happier and living what I viewed as a life I wanted. To have a family to experience love, to be one of my peers. Instead I experience suppression by those in charge, even punishment. I experience a lot of rejection. I wasn’t exposed to what you may call a normal life. And I suffered from all of this. In this loneliness I did a lot of thinking, and at times I was inspired to pray. Eventually I was exposed to some noble and good, and holy Christian Catholics, who lived what they believed, and I started to experience real love, and concern. Because of them believing in their faith, and putting it to action they communicated the love God to me. Their motivation was supernatural. Once I was on the right track the rest of my life speaks for itself. My encounter with Christ grew over the years. The prayer I offer, knowing that you do not believe in prayer, is the result of Gods’ goodness to me. It is a witness to where spiritually, the Spirit of Truth led me. I don’t expect you to believe me or even to accept the spiritual witness but I offer it for your scrutinizing.

Holy Father, Creator, I acknowledge my total dependence upon You. You love me through no merit of my own because You are Love itself. I thank You for sending your Son, Jesus Christ to bring me back to You. I am sorry for all my offences. In the Holy Name of Jesus, I ask you Father to release your Holy Spirit in my being. Inflame me with Faith, Hope and Love and all the virtues. Grant me your holy joy and peace that the world can not give. Heal me in body and soul according to Your Will. Expel all that is anti-Christ within me. Glorify Jesus in me and glorify your Kingdom here on earth. I worship you in union with Mary, the angels and Saints now and for ever.

 

[ynotzap]

Incidentlly those noble people happen to be Irish, but some of the Irish turned out to be my opponents, discernment, discernment, discernment!