God is not a...

[PRmerger]

However, I would continue to hold that actions such as her rape and torture, cancer in infants, mass murder…and so on, are strong evidence for a non-interventionist deity…a creator…not a manager.

It is no more evidence for a non-interventionist deity than a father permitting his 8 yr old daughter to be stabbed with an IV needle (“He just sat in the chair and watched while 3 nurses held me down and another nurse stabbed me 4 times!”) is evidence for a non-interventionist father.

He knows that any explanation he gives to his child will not convince her of the reason for her suffering.

 

[e_c]

It is no more evidence for a non-interventionist deity than a father permitting his 8 yr old daughter to be stabbed with an IV needle (“He just sat in the chair and watched while 3 nurses held me down and another nurse stabbed me 4 times!”) is evidence for a non-interventionist father.

He knows that any explanation he gives to his child will not convince her of the reason for her suffering.

I like this image. The more the child moves and tries to escape, the more painful it will be. If she does escape, she will get sick. Etc.

As for the voice that says, if you are the son of God, save yourself and us, I think I have heard that before.

 

[Solmyr]

Oh, that is indeed a big problem for you and your questioning child.

Don’t be so arrogant. You are not in the position to decide what is a “problem” for others.

An example of the cause having the same thing is the sun heating my drink: the sun has heat that it gives to the ice water.

The extra particle which causes a pile of plutonium to blow up (getting to the critical mass) does not have the ability to blow up by itself. If you are just one second late to catch the bus to the airport, and therefore you miss the plane and as such cannot sign a vitally important document, the consequences can be disastrous… and yet… it was only a second being late at the bus station. Thomism is too simplistic to have relevance in reality.

I like this image.

It is her favorite cop-out, brought up and refuted periodically. The human father does NOT have the power to heal the child without the described “crude” method. But God - allegedly - has such a power. In the middle ages the only anesthetics available was to “bite down on a bullet”. If a doctor would use that primitive method today, he would be rightfully considered a butcher.

 

[oldcelt]

It is no more evidence for a non-interventionist deity than a father permitting his 8 yr old daughter to be stabbed with an IV needle (“He just sat in the chair and watched while 3 nurses held me down and another nurse stabbed me 4 times!”) is evidence for a non-interventionist father.

He knows that any explanation he gives to his child will not convince her of the reason for her suffering.

But that human father would try to explain. Truly PR, I have heard this “explanation” many times, and it doesn’t get better with multiple use.
We are talking about a God here, not a human father. There can be no justification for the slow death of a child from some horrid disease and it does not require that one is a deity to see that. Rather, it is a horrible consequence, for some, of simply being born. Life on this planet is dangerous, and sometimes brutal.

John

 

[PRmerger]

But that human father would try to explain.

Sure.

Let’s say it’s your 5 yr old child getting ready for K-garten and she has to get 5 shots.

You explain to her that she needs this for school
You tell her that it’s to help her not get sick.
You tell her that her body needs this.

I guarantee you that NO CHILD will respond, “Oh! Thank you, Daddy! I do understand now. Ok. You DO love me even if you did nothing while people tortured me!”

That’s so nonsensical. Anyone who knows anything about human nature knows that the explanations don’t suffice.

 

[PRmerger]

Don’t be so arrogant. You are not in the position to decide what is a “problem” for others.

LOL!

Let me just show you the inconsistency (again) here:

I had fun doing a search for all the times Sol identified what things are “problems” for others.

forums.catholic-questions.org/search.php?searchid=25451351



Now, you may have to sift through some of the posts…but they’re all there, posts where Sol has reserved for himself the right to identify what’s a “problem” for others, while, curiously, objecting to this in others.

 

[PRmerger]

It is her favorite cop-out, brought up and refuted periodically.

Brought up frequently, yes. It’s a trump card, to be sure. And it is indeed one of my faves.

But refuted?

The human father does NOT have the power to heal the child without the described “crude” method.

Please try to think in the abstract here, Sol. The parallel is not that the father can heal the child.

The parallel is that the father could intervene…but doesn’t.

But we know that there’s a very good reason for his allowing this intense suffering.

The child simply cannot understand the intricacies of cell-mediated vs humoral immunity, exogenous antigenic catalysts, the generation of cytotoxic T-lymphocytes…

All she thinks, if she’s bratty, is, “My daddy is a big meanie!”

 

[e_c]

Don’t be so arrogant. You are not in the position to decide what is a “problem” for others.

The extra particle which causes a pile of plutonium to blow up (getting to the critical mass) does not have the ability to blow up by itself. If you are just one second late to catch the bus to the airport, and therefore you miss the plane and as such cannot sign a vitally important document, the consequences can be disastrous… and yet… it was only a second being late at the bus station. Thomism is too simplistic to have relevance in reality.

It is her favorite cop-out, brought up and refuted periodically. The human father does NOT have the power to heal the child without the described “crude” method. But God - allegedly - has such a power. In the middle ages the only anesthetics available was to “bite down on a bullet”. If a doctor would use that primitive method today, he would be rightfully considered a butcher.

I’ll just stick to addressing the causation issue…

Take the war example. The first problem is that it is describing a negative (losing), but suppose you say it causes the other side to win. Fine. The next problem is that there is a facile attempt to measure something immaterial (gaining a victory) with something material. But some rewording would fix that. OK. The real issue is that there is more to the cause of war being won than the nail… Including all the things that you mentioned. A nail’s absence does not provide a sufficient condition to win a war… You actually have to have a fight.

The same problem exists in the second example. A condition (which is possibly not even a necessary condition, though my chemistry is not good) is conflated with the totality of the efficient cause. That’s the problem.

 

[e_c]

But that human father would try to explain. Truly PR, I have heard this “explanation” many times, and it doesn’t get better with multiple use.
We are talking about a God here, not a human father. There can be no justification for the slow death of a child from some horrid disease and it does not require that one is a deity to see that. Rather, it is a horrible consequence, for some, of simply being born. Life on this planet is dangerous, and sometimes brutal.

John

So you reject categorically every alleged intervention? Every last one? That’s a big claim. We make a big claim too, but every claim with this kind of stuff is big.

Once again… If you are the Christ, save yourself and us! He doesn’t always mean for it to work out nicely for us in this life. The main point of the miracles of the Lord was to gesture to Himself and the next world… Not for everyone to have a good day. And several times He doesn’t work a miracle when we would think it to be opportune.

This too goes back to the original issue of primacy. He is the rule and measure of wisdom, not us.

 

[Lucretius]

The extra particle which causes a pile of plutonium to blow up (getting to the critical mass) does not have the ability to blow up by itself. If you are just one second late to catch the bus to the airport, and therefore you miss the plane and as such cannot sign a vitally important document, the consequences can be disastrous… and yet… it was only a second being late at the bus station. Thomism is too simplistic to have relevance in reality.

None of what you wrote refuted Thomism…Thomists think of terms of things, and you might be thinking in terms of events.

I’ve never heard someone critique Thomism as too simplistic, Scholasticism is usually dismissed as overly complex. Modern philosophers wanted to simplify philosophy even.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[e_c]

None of what you wrote refuted Thomism…Thomists think of terms of things, and you might be thinking in terms of events.

This is good. It draws the attention to the cause in itself, which is important… The greater point being that the effect came from a cause, and that cause had to contain both the potential for what has been effected and also contain itself. It is a very basic law of being.

Which means… What is radically first must be radically greatest.

 

[oldcelt]

So you reject categorically every alleged intervention? Every last one? That’s a big claim. We make a big claim too, but every claim with this kind of stuff is big.

Once again… If you are the Christ, save yourself and us! He doesn’t always mean for it to work out nicely for us in this life. The main point of the miracles of the Lord was to gesture to Himself and the next world… Not for everyone to have a good day. And several times He doesn’t work a miracle when we would think it to be opportune.

This too goes back to the original issue of primacy. He is the rule and measure of wisdom, not us.

Every single one…no exception. The rest I also do not believe…at all.

Be well,

John

 

[oldcelt]

Sure.

Let’s say it’s your 5 yr old child getting ready for K-garten and she has to get 5 shots.

You explain to her that she needs this for school
You tell her that it’s to help her not get sick.
You tell her that her body needs this.

I guarantee you that NO CHILD will respond, “Oh! Thank you, Daddy! I do understand now. Ok. You DO love me even if you did nothing while people tortured me!”

That’s so nonsensical. Anyone who knows anything about human nature knows that the explanations don’t suffice.

I never said that they would suffice…though I suspect that they would on occasion. I simply said that the human father would try, even knowing that he lacks the power to ease the suffering. Then, consider the Christian God…

Be well,

John

 

[PRmerger]

I never said that they would suffice…though I suspect that they would on occasion. I simply said that the human father would try, even knowing that he lacks the power to ease the suffering. Then, consider the Christian God…

Be well,

John

And our God does try.

It’s better than the “Snob God” of deism (paraphrasing Peter Kreeft here) who creates the world but then says, “The hell with it”.

catholic.com/radio/shows/how-to-be-holy-pre-recorded-35583

I don’t see how your version of God is any different, old celt. Do you?

 

[oldcelt]

And our God does try.

It’s better than the “Snob God” of deism (paraphrasing Peter Kreeft here) who creates the world but then says, “The hell with it”.

catholic.com/radio/shows/how-to-be-holy-pre-recorded-35583

I don’t see how your version of God is any different, old celt. Do you?

Quite different…Kreeft assumes human-style intentions in creating. Deists do not…there may be no why as we would view it. So far as the Christian God “trying,” you must have a tangible example of that…'cause I can’t think of one.

Be well,

John

 

[Lucretius]

Quite different…Kreeft assumes human-style intentions in creating. Deists do not…there may be no why as we would view it. So far as the Christian God “trying,” you must have a tangible example of that…'cause I can’t think of one.

Be well,

John

Christians, at least those of the Traditional Churches, don’t anthromorphize God, and actually devote time to telling us that we can’t really know much about God.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[PRmerger]

Quite different…Kreeft assumes human-style intentions in creating. Deists do not…there may be no why as we would view it. So far as the Christian God “trying,” you must have a tangible example of that…'cause I can’t think of one.

Be well,

John

The deist God is still a snob god.

And it leaves you with the problem of pain as well.

 

[oldcelt]

The deist God is still a snob god.

And it leaves you with the problem of pain as well.

So you’re down to name-calling. I generally take that as a sign that I am winning the discussion.
What problem with pain…we evolved with pain as a warning system. We weren’t created with pain as a punishment…but that’s that snobby Deist belief system again.

John

 

[e_c]

Quite different…Kreeft assumes human-style intentions in creating. Deists do not…there may be no why as we would view it. So far as the Christian God “trying,” you must have a tangible example of that…'cause I can’t think of one.

Be well,

John

Then you are just being stubborn. God smacks the world in the face with miracles, apparitions, etc. Read the lives of the saints. Study Lourdes, Lanciano, Zeitoun, etc., etc., etc. If you come to it without a preconceived idea that God doesn’t work in Creation, you will be utterly convinced that He does. In any case, it doesn’t seem to be an intellectual problem for you but one of the will. I can’t be of much help there. All I can do for you here is say it’s worth making the jump.

 

[oldcelt]

Then you are just being stubborn. God smacks the world in the face with miracles, apparitions, etc. Read the lives of the saints. Study Lourdes, Lanciano, Zeitoun, etc., etc., etc. If you come to it without a preconceived idea that God doesn’t work in Creation, you will be utterly convinced that He does. In any case, it doesn’t seem to be an intellectual problem for you but one of the will. I can’t be of much help there. All I can do for you here is say it’s worth making the jump.

Having studied a good many of the events you list, I find that there are earthly explanations for all. It was during a period of very deep study into my Catholic faith (cradle Catholic) that I made the leap…though not the one you think I should have.

John