How does God bring good out of evil: When a 5 year old girl is raped and murdered?

[minux]

Your comment is moral relativism to the core. A bad situation is seperate from God’s divinity. You have the choice to be a sinner or a saint. God gives you that choice. God’s grander plan is totally seperate from an adult raping a five year old. You are narcissistic if you find that situation excusable.

For your moral relativism to be true, you would have to know the exact nature of God. Your argument is weak foundationally.

 

[minux]

Salvation and redemption is seperate from the situation in question. Salvation and redemption do not make an immoral act Excusable. Nor can you speculate why God allows such a situation in the first place.

 

[pacloc]

if you find that situation excusable

Reread what I wrote. I never said the act was excusable. Once again, I don’t understand your link to relativism. What does this have to do with relativism? I agree that we have the choice to be a sinner or saint, in the sense of responding to God’s grace. I don’t see how that means that God’s grander plan is totally separate from the evil event of the topic. How can you separate them?

I don’t think we necessarily disagree, but there must be a misunderstanding we are having with each other.

 

[goout]

Salvation and redemption is seperate from the situation in question. Salvation and redemption do not make an immoral act Excusable. Nor can you speculate why God allows such a situation in the first place.

Suffering is a mystery, in that we cannot fully understand it, and at the same time it can point to a deeper reality through redemption. A mystery is not the capitulation of understanding, it is an invitation to deeper understanding.

An immoral act is not excusable, but it is redeemed by God through the cross of Christ. It is our responsibility as you say to participate in that redemption.
This is why it is our responsibility to feed the hungry , visit the imprisoned etc…so those evils that people deal with may contribute to redemption, through our cooperation with the grace of Christ’s cross.

It is a paradox for sure, but those things we consider paradoxes seem to work in God’s kingdom.

 

[esieffe]

But I didn’t say that. I said “perhaps”. I also said she might have suffered a different kind of pain. IOW, I offered two things which might have been, as far as the person’s ultimate salvation, worse (eternally) than what happened. I didn’t say it was why it happened, or that it would have happened, or tell a grieving family’ that this is why their daughter died. So please, don’t try to give ME a bad name I do not deserve.

The use of "perhaps’ is a conditional kind of “what if”. It means that what follows might be an explanation, or it might not, not that it absolutely is what would have happened.

Agreed. It is a fact, albeit a sad and horrible fact, that some sins, crimes, and attacks… SOME of these I say, can result in the victim committing sins themselves. For example, if a boy is brought up in a violent family, there is a chance that he too may become violent. A chance I say.

Romans 14:13
Do Not Cause Others to Sin
13 For that reason we should stop judging each other. We must make up our minds not to do anything that will make another Christian sin.

“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.”

• Mark 9:42

Discussing this should not imply disrespect for the victim or their family, though it is not the kind of thing you would say to them at all out of respect for their grief obviously. This distinction should not require an explanation.

In one of Saint Bosco’s visions of hell he describes one such a situation, but a much worse one. We are here on earth to prepare for heaven, and to go forth to multiply if that is our vocation, to glorify God, and to bring others to our Lord’s table. That is it. God wants us to join him, and his ways are often beyond our ways of understanding.

 

[minux]

Generally, I am eye to eye with you in this discussion. A few rough ashlars persist:

This is why it is our responsibility to feed the hungry , visit the imprisoned etc…so those evils that people deal with may contribute to redemption, through our cooperation with the grace of Christ’s cross.

Helping the homeless or imprisoned has nothing to do with the subject’s (i.e., those homeless or imprisoned) actions be them sinful or moral. We help and pray for those less fortunate, because it is the right thing to do, as substantiated by the actions and words of Our Savior.

The Prosperity Gospel is nonsensical. Us members of the County Club must really have God’s favor! Just because someone is rich and not in jail does not mean God loves them more. God loves every one of us equally. God loves us despite our sins. The reason why we should help those less fortunate is we should try to echo God’s egalitarianism for his beings with one another.

Suffering is a mystery, in that we cannot fully understand it, and at the same time it can point to a deeper reality through redemption. A mystery is not the capitulation of understanding, it is an invitation to deeper understanding.

The action in question is not moral and was committed by the sin of man.

It is a paradox for sure, but those things we consider paradoxes seem to work in God’s kingdom.

What is the paradox? The action in question is black and white.

If we ask the question, why does sin persist despite humanity knowing of the Savior? The obvious answer is that people are not living in accordance with God: they are not walking with God nor are they loving God.

 

[minux]

Reread what I wrote. I never said the act was excusable. Once again, I don’t understand your link to relativism. What does this have to do with relativism? I agree that we have the choice to be a sinner or saint, in the sense of responding to God’s grace. I don’t see how that means that God’s grander plan is totally separate from the evil event of the topic. How can you separate them?

No, God’s plan is not a mystery, but we are mixing up different aspects of apologetics. At our foundation, God wanted us the ability to love God and live in accordance with God. Concur/non-concur?

When sin occurs by an individual, this has nothing to do with God’s plan of giving us the freewill of choice. Nor should we justify something not in accord with God and love for the silver lining.

The relativism in question is part of a further question as to why sin persists. The simple answer is we are in this communion of existence together. We are all responsible for such travesties.

Until we take personal accountability for the homeless, refugees, and yes, murderers, the Words of Our Savior will forever metaphorically echo through our hearts: “For the poor you have always with you: but me you have not always.” This has so many applicable abstractions, but is very germane to this conversation. Meaning, we are far from perfect, and we have these lapses in our existence. No great mystery exists for the condition or state of the World.

 

[rinnie]

Tell me this how can God give us free will to sin or not to sin? So then what good comes out of the sin itself nothing absolutely nothing. But what we ourself dig up to help the inocente Who were hurt. How we pick up the inocente off the ground and show them they are loved and all of us are not evil. it’s our loving response to the hurt that beings out the good out of a horrible unspeakable crime.its our hatred for the abuse and our willingness to help and suffer with the inocente Who suffer. It’s putting yourself out there and taking crap for something you had nothing to do with. It’s your love that grace God gave only you. And your willingness to use it

 

[minux]

It’s putting yourself out there and taking crap for something you had nothing to do with.

Well said! That is exactly the point

 

[minux]

… to glorify God, and to bring others to our Lord’s table.

This is perhaps under shadowed more than anything. Catholicism is not an individualistic religion. We go to Communion, we celebrate the sacraments in public, we publicly confess our sins, etc.

One’s relationship with God is unique. We should desire that everyone feels God’s love. When I profess the Gospel, I pray those who receive the Word go on to get to know God better than I. Then come back to my and say, here, I now have something for you. We should give more than we receive and that goes for our fellow man.

When travesties happen, we should not leave it to God to make the situation right or leave it to fate. We should take up the Cross and make the situation right for the sinner and saint. That is our responsibility as God’s children. God wants us to help one another. Just as a person does bad, we have the choice to do right or make a situation right.

 

[Vico]

…
I would still like to know your thoughts in your own words.

You have them already, but you did not like them.
“Providence is for the purpose of the end not the process.”

 

[minux]

“Providence is for the purpose of the end not the process.”

I am guilty in this thread of asking ambiguous questions, but I enjoy learning why you believe what you do.

Two questions for you: what is your role in anther’s sin? Irrespective of divine providence, is the action of sin evil?

 

[goout]

Generally, I am eye to eye with you in this discussion. A few rough ashlars persist:

goout:

This is why it is our responsibility to feed the hungry , visit the imprisoned etc…so those evils that people deal with may contribute to redemption, through our cooperation with the grace of Christ’s cross.

Helping the homeless or imprisoned has nothing to do with the subject’s (i.e., those homeless or imprisoned) actions be them sinful or moral.

My post didn’t address the culpability of any person who’s homeless or imprisoned.
?
You kinda ran right by my point to prove something else.

The Prosperity Gospel is nonsensical.

Of course it is inimical to Christianity. Not sure why you bring that up in response?

The action in question is not moral and was committed by the sin of man.

Of course.
?
And God offers the redemption of every human condition and action, in and through Christ.

It is a paradox for sure, but those things we consider paradoxes seem to work in God’s kingdom.

What is the paradox? The action in question is black and white.

I am talking about the redemption of suffering and evil. The Gospel is paradoxical to man’s way of thinking and acting. We tend to believe and act as if suffering and death are the last word and the most powerful things in life.

The Gospel offers a paradox:
in the acceptance of grace God redeems our lives from suffering and death to love.

We sure talked past one another there.

 

[abucs]

The Gospel offers a paradox:

In the garden of Eden man chooses the tree of life and brings death.
In the garden of Gethsemane God chooses the tree of death and brings life.

For me this is the deep paradox at the heart of Christianity.

 

[minux]

so those evils that people deal

culpability of any person

Your words make it seems that you have non-homeless and homeless. You words appear that those who are homeless are wrong.

Of course it is inimical to Christianity

Should not be in the same dialogue as Christianity.

God offers the redemption of every human condition and action, in and through Christ.

We tend to believe and act as if suffering and death are the last word and the most powerful things in life.

We sure talked past one another there.

What does this have to do with your role in another’s grievous sin? To be clearer, what is your responsibility to those who sin and are harmed by sin?

 

[Vico]

Vico:

“Providence is for the purpose of the end not the process.”

I am guilty in this thread of asking ambiguous questions, but I enjoy learning why you believe what you do.

Two questions for you: what is your role in anther’s sin? Irrespective of divine providence, is the action of sin evil?

Moral evil is a privation of conformity to right reason and to the law of God. An objective moral evil is a material sin when a person does it either without knowledge that it is wrong, or under duress and without internal consent to the evil whereas formal actual sin is committed through a free personal act or omission of the individual will.

A person has a responsibility for the sins committed by others when there was cooperation in them through direct voluntary participation, or by direct voluntary approval.

 

[minux]

A person has a responsibility for the sins committed by others when there was cooperation in them through direct voluntary participation, or by direct voluntary approval.

You are saying that unless you cooperated in the sin, you have no responsibility in the sin?

Moral evil is a privation of conformity to right reason and to the law of God. An objective moral evil is a material sin when a person does it either without knowledge that it is wrong, or under duress and without internal consent to the evil whereas formal actual sin is committed through a free personal act or omission of the individual will.

You concur certain acts are immoral?

 

[esieffe]

When travesties happen, we should not leave it to God to make the situation right or leave it to fate.

I don’t disagree. As we cannot fully know God’s will, we have to act for the side of good. I think that is expected of us. We are expected to do footwork, and we are expected not to co-operate wit evil.

I just have to be careful not to prop myself up to the level of God. I have to be watchful of my motives and question my assumptions. Pride is the “sneakiest” of sins.

 

[rinnie]

Our responsibility is to for one thing love the sinner hate the sin kind of thing. Pretty impossible to do at times forgive pray for such a horrible person. But then we have to think of Christ how can he do this. For us and the ones we love. It’s so easy for me to judge others when my children have been lucky enough to no be subjected to violence or such discusting ways of life. But I ask myself what if they were what if these unthinkable acts were a way of life from birth for them what would they be like what would I be like. That’s when you get on your knees and thank God for what you were given and pray for those who never truly had much chance. And really give thanks for those who lived this way and overcame it. There are fewer that could. I am sure a life we could never understand or overcome ourselves. I believe for many the mental and physical abuse suffered they just snap.

 

[goout]

I have no idea what you are looking for.
I have no idea how you get

you have non-homeless and homeless. You words appear that those who are homeless are wrong.

from my post.
There was nothing remotely like that in there.
?

And that’s ok, I don’t need a response, I’m just pointing out that if you are concerned with what I said, you missed the point. No problem.