God judges on what COULD have been?

[Loboto-Me]

I’m having a discussion with someone from another board and I’m confused.

I know I recognise this type of thought from somewhere but I can’t for the life of me remember who “thinks” like this.

Let me give you part of her post, and maybe you guys can recognise who’s theory this is, and where I could find info on refuting it. This post is in response to my asking what happens to aborted babies after death. There are other things that she says which seem a bit “off”, but this is a person who says she has been having private revelations from God Himself. I won’t say it isn’t true, as private revelations do happen (I believe) but, in this case, I don’t think so. The clincher was her response here (too similar to a protestant belief I remember seeing somewhere).

Her Post:

**As to what happens to the babies, well, that gets into some difficult to comprehend things. But, I’ll try to simplify. There is only one actual timeline reality that is valid. It is the one wherein God himself resides, at any given moment. But, while he only inhabits one of them, he can see multiple timelines from which to choose. So, in some timelines, those babies lived out a full life and made the choices they would make here had they lived. He knows how and why they chose what they chose. They are judged on that. **

The reason God can make a sound judgment based on an alternate timeline is because in all possible timelines, a given individual ends up making the same ultimate choice – they just take different routes to get there. But the destination is always the same. That is why God knows who belongs to him and who doesn’t. He can see it play out dozens, hundreds, thousands, millions of times. In good circumstances, and bad. With lots of benefits, or hardly any. People still end up choosing him, or they don’t. And the choice is always consistent.

---

 

[byzmelkite]

Loboto-Me:

I’m having a discussion with someone from another board and I’m confused.

I know I recognise this type of thought from somewhere but I can’t for the life of me remember who “thinks” like this.

Let me give you part of her post, and maybe you guys can recognise who’s theory this is, and where I could find info on refuting it. This post is in response to my asking what happens to aborted babies after death. There are other things that she says which seem a bit “off”, but this is a person who says she has been having private revelations from God Himself. I won’t say it isn’t true, as private revelations do happen (I believe) but, in this case, I don’t think so. The clincher was her response here (too similar to a protestant belief I remember seeing somewhere).

Her Post:

**As to what happens to the babies, well, that gets into some difficult to comprehend things. But, I’ll try to simplify. There is only one actual timeline reality that is valid. It is the one wherein God himself resides, at any given moment. But, while he only inhabits one of them, he can see multiple timelines from which to choose. So, in some timelines, those babies lived out a full life and made the choices they would make here had they lived. He knows how and why they chose what they chose. They are judged on that. **

The reason God can make a sound judgment based on an alternate timeline is because in all possible timelines, a given individual ends up making the same ultimate choice – they just take different routes to get there. But the destination is always the same. That is why God knows who belongs to him and who doesn’t. He can see it play out dozens, hundreds, thousands, millions of times. In good circumstances, and bad. With lots of benefits, or hardly any. People still end up choosing him, or they don’t. And the choice is always consistent.

---

Some rather interesting speculations. I would say that, in part, this poster seems to be influenced by Molinism, a legitimate theological theory concerning God’s foreknowledge and predestination. Molina taught that God offers salvific grace to those He knows will make the best use of that grace. God is able to foresee this through “middle knowledge,” i.e. knowledge of all of the possible outcomes in the future. This is just one theory of how God determines who is predestined to heaven and who is reprobated to hell. The poster you are dialoging with seems to have her own interesting spin on it all, but it is much too speculative and impossible to verify I think.

The Church wisely remains relatively silent on the fate of unbaptized infants. Though some councils do seem to suggest that infants who die without baptism go to hell, but receive the lightest punishments. This was the view of St. Augustine. Some other theologians taught that such infants went to limbo, a place of natural happiness, but that they were deprived of the vision of God since they were still bound by original sin.

A very small minority of Christian fathers and theologians believed in the possibility that unbaptized infants would go to heaven. Recently, it seems that most think that unbaptized babies automatically go to heaven. But then again, most seem to believe that everyone automatically goes to heaven. So, I wouldn’t trust current sentiment too much. All we can do is commend the deceased to the mercy of God and remember them in our prayers. God is both just and merciful so whatever He does will be right.

 

[Spooky7272]

As to what happens to the babies, well, that gets into some difficult to comprehend things. But, I’ll try to simplify. There is only one actual timeline reality that is valid. It is the one wherein God himself resides, at any given moment. But, while he only inhabits one of them, he can see multiple timelines from which to choose. So, in some timelines, those babies lived out a full life and made the choices they would make here had they lived. He knows how and why they chose what they chose. They are judged on that.

This sounds like Calvinism to me; predestination.

 

[byzmelkite]

Spooky7272:

This sounds like Calvinism to me; predestination.

Not exactly, though its compatible with Calvinism and with an Augustinian/Thomistic view and with a Molinist view.

The Church does teach the reality of predestination. What is not defined is how predestination specifically relates to grace and free will. This is where the two principle theological schools diverge (Thomist and Molinist). The Thomist position is much closer to Calvinism and the Molinist position is much closer to Arminianism.

 

[1ke]

Loboto-Me:

I’m having a discussion with someone from another board and I’m confused.

I know I recognise this type of thought from somewhere but I can’t for the life of me remember who “thinks” like this.

Let me give you part of her post, and maybe you guys can recognise who’s theory this is, and where I could find info on refuting it. This post is in response to my asking what happens to aborted babies after death. There are other things that she says which seem a bit “off”, but this is a person who says she has been having private revelations from God Himself. I won’t say it isn’t true, as private revelations do happen (I believe) but, in this case, I don’t think so. The clincher was her response here (too similar to a protestant belief I remember seeing somewhere).

Her Post:

**As to what happens to the babies, well, that gets into some difficult to comprehend things. But, I’ll try to simplify. There is only one actual timeline reality that is valid. It is the one wherein God himself resides, at any given moment. But, while he only inhabits one of them, he can see multiple timelines from which to choose. So, in some timelines, those babies lived out a full life and made the choices they would make here had they lived. He knows how and why they chose what they chose. They are judged on that. **

The reason God can make a sound judgment based on an alternate timeline is because in all possible timelines, a given individual ends up making the same ultimate choice – they just take different routes to get there. But the destination is always the same. That is why God knows who belongs to him and who doesn’t. He can see it play out dozens, hundreds, thousands, millions of times. In good circumstances, and bad. With lots of benefits, or hardly any. People still end up choosing him, or they don’t. And the choice is always consistent.

---

Wait… I saw this episode of Stargate last season!

This person is seriously disturbed. This is not biblical, it’s not even L. Ron Hubbard. It’s delusional.

 

[But_for_Grace]

God does not judge on what “could have been” because what doesn’t happen has no potentiallity. God is omnicient and eternal, that is he is all knowing and unchanging. Therefore, if God knows what will happen then he always knew it would happen lest we say that God changes. This being the case, God has no need to prepare potential futures because he knows every choice we will make and the consequences of these choises. This does not contradict free will because our hand is not forced, so to speak, merely anticipated. However, if God allowed multiple timelines or prepared for multiple futures, then this would imply a lack of omnicence which we also must not falsely imply.

By the way this is similar to what you find in St. Thomas’s Summa Theologica

 

[byzmelkite]

But for Grace:

God does not judge on what “could have been” because what doesn’t happen has no potentiallity. God is omnicient and eternal, that is he is all knowing and unchanging. Therefore, if God knows what will happen then he always knew it would happen lest we say that God changes. This being the case, God has no need to prepare potential futures because he knows every choice we will make and the consequences of these choises. This does not contradict free will because our hand is not forced, so to speak, merely anticipated. However, if God allowed multiple timelines or prepared for multiple futures, then this would imply a lack of omnicence which we also must not falsely imply.

By the way this is similar to what you find in St. Thomas’s Summa Theologica

Well, here is a question. Could things have been other than what they actually are? If not, then everything happens by necessity. If so, then either God has knowledge of how things could be, even though they are not (middle knowledge) or God doesn’t. Some would argue that God must have middle knowledge or God is not omniscient. I don’t have a firm opinion on the matter myself.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Loboto-me:

Pin the poster down. On exactly what is she basing this belief? Upon whose authority does she believe this?

 

[MonicaC]

byzmelkite:

Well, here is a question. Could things have been other than what they actually are? If not, then everything happens by necessity. If so, then either God has knowledge of how things could be, even though they are not (middle knowledge) or God doesn’t. Some would argue that God must have middle knowledge or God is not omniscient. I don’t have a firm opinion on the matter myself.

I think that we need to remember that GOd is outside of time, something you or I have no consuput of. I Personally believe that he knows what we are suppose to do and what we are going to do but since we have free will he is just hoping that we do the right thing, if that makes any sense? I once saw a cartoon of a man asking God why don’t you do something to stop AIDS and cancer. God replied I have but you keep aborting it. I thought that this was such an awsome way of thinking and realizing that even though GOd knows the future it is still ultimatly up to us to do the right thing.

Monica

 

[Loboto-Me]

Kay Cee:

Loboto-me:

Pin the poster down. On exactly what is she basing this belief? Upon whose authority does she believe this?

Kay Cee,

She bases her opinion on actually talking to God, face to face! Yes, I do believe she’s delusional.

If you don’t mind, I’ll give you guys the link to her posts. Her name is “amjoie” She describes her “story” and if you click on her name, you will see the other posts in other areas that she has told parts of her “story”. Don’t worry she hasn’t got thousands of posts

modthesims2.com/showthread.php?t=74390

 

[Wildgraywolf]

1ke:

Wait… I saw this episode of Stargate last season!

This person is seriously disturbed. This is not biblical, it’s not even L. Ron Hubbard. It’s delusional.

Naw, it was a Start Trek episode. Just ask Q.

 

[Wildgraywolf]

1ke:

Wait… I saw this episode of Stargate last season!

Naw, it sounds more like a Star Trek episode with Q.

 

[TobyLue]

Wait… I saw this episode of Stargate last season!

Nope, nope, nope. That was Back to the Future II , or was it III. You know, messing with the space-time continuum. It happened, but then it didn’t happen because a different choice was made but then went back and corrected it and everything was changed and only the one changing it was aware of the changes, but no changes were made because a decision was changed and, and, … uhmm ,.
hmmm…… ehh…:ehh:

 

[But_for_Grace]

hence the reasonablity of what I posted above

 

[puzzleannie]

Loboto-Me:

**There is only one actual timeline reality that is valid. It is the one wherein God himself resides, at any given moment. But, while he only inhabits one of them, he can see multiple timelines from which to choose. **]

Wrong. God does not inhabit any “timeline”. God is eternal, without beginning or end, existing in eternity. God created time, He exists outside time. Time is a construct of the created universe, and is the movement of created things: stars, planets etc., and the inhabitants of planets, in relation to the rest of creation. God does not look back to the past or see into the future. He is outside linear or relative time and knows in His eternal “present” all events that we measure in terms of time .

 

[Kay_Cee]

Loboto-Me:

Kay Cee,

She bases her opinion on actually talking to God, face to face! Yes, I do believe she’s delusional.

If you don’t mind, I’ll give you guys the link to her posts. Her name is “amjoie” She describes her “story” and if you click on her name, you will see the other posts in other areas that she has told parts of her “story”. Don’t worry she hasn’t got thousands of posts

modthesims2.com/showthread.php?t=74390

Yup, I kind of figured it was something like that.

This just goes to show how important it is to have a Magisterium with teaching authority. Even saints who actually did have inner locutions always submitted to the authority of the church.

This sounds as subjective as a Mormon “burning in the bosom.”

You might ask her why you should believe her if somebody else also claiming direct communication with God is telling you the exact opposite. What evidence can she show to verify that her “communications” are from a heavenly source instead of coming from her own mind or, worse, a demonic source? After all, a demon can disguise itself as an angel of light.

 

[Loboto-Me]

Kay Cee,

I think I might ask her this next time I see her posting. I hope you don’t mind my copying your words, as I think you’ve said it better than I could have.

It’s kind of sad though… but, to tell you the truth, I don’t think it’s the devil speaking because had it been, it would have brought her further from God rather than her wanting to praise Him, dontcha think?

I think it’s her own mind, and I’m grateful that at least it’s something that she find comfort in, although a little skewed.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Loboto-Me:

Kay Cee,

I think I might ask her this next time I see her posting. I hope you don’t mind my copying your words, as I think you’ve said it better than I could have.

It’s kind of sad though… but, to tell you the truth, I don’t think it’s the devil speaking because had it been, it would have brought her further from God rather than her wanting to praise Him, dontcha think?

I think it’s her own mind, and I’m grateful that at least it’s something that she find comfort in, although a little skewed.

You’re more than welcome to use anything I post here!

I agree that it’s probably not the devil, but I mentioned it as a possibility. It’s more likely a delusional self-interest where she’s trying to re-create God in an image she’s comfortable with. All of us, from time to time, would like to do that.

If she’s Catholic, you might point out that saints who have received private revelations have always submitted them to the authority of the Church.

If she’s not Catholic, you might ask her where scripture supports what she’s saying.

Anyway, glad I could be of help!