I am baffled, please explain

[PumpkinCookie]

Pallas, with all due respect, did you even read the post I quoted?

You are erroneously looking at God creating Adam and Eve through a timeline. It is not as if God was existing for several thousand years and then decided “Hey, I want to make people. Hmm… If I make Adam and Eve, they’re going to eventually disobey me and throw the rest of my creation into chaos through the abuse of their free will… Maybe I should make Steve and Suzie instead because they won’t… Nahh! Adam and Eve it is!”

Would you say that God is ignorant of alternative possibilities? Sometimes called “future conditionals.” Or, do you say that God doesn’t know what would happen, only what does happen?

Why didn’t God create Steve and Suzie instead? Because He wanted us to have free will. He wills all of us to choose Heaven. He does not will all of us to be forced into Heaven. The problem here is that, in asserting that everyone should have been made in such a way that, despite being given the option to disobey, never would, you disregard the fact that this effectively robs people of their free will. They will never have the desire to disobey because that is how they were made. Thus it will never happen.

Can you please clarify by what reason the hypothetical obedient ancestors would not have free will if they happened to obey? I truly don’t understand, and I think I’m not alone. This would benefit all. Please spell it out.

Mary was not, in fact, *made *in such a way that she would never desire to disobey. She simply never desired to disobey God’s will. That was her choice and her choice alone. God did not decide for her. Unlike Adam and Eve, when God asked Mary to do something, she obeyed. They did not.

OK yes I suppose that could be true (regarding Mary). I’m not sure this is Catholic teaching, but let’s grant this. In that case, why couldn’t Steve and Suzie also “simply never desire to disobey God’s will?” Since God has created a creature whom he has always and will always know would choose to obey him, why couldn’t he have created our ancestors to be that way?

The problem at hand is not the fact that Adam and Eve were somehow imperfect while Mary was more perfect, and that Steve and Suzie would have also been more perfect that Adam and Eve. They would have been literally no different. We have the exact same options that Mary had and that Adam and Eve had and that every other human in history has ever had. Give of oneself and serve God’s will out of love, or assert one’s own will over God’s. Not only do we have the same options, we have the same ability to choose one or the other. The only reason Adam and Eve’s sin was even important is because it passed the state of Original Sin onto the rest of humanity. Other than that, their actions have no real bearing on our own decisions. At the end of the day, what I choose is not your choice, or Mary’s, or Steve’s, or Adam’s, or my parents’. It is mine. Whether I choose to do God’s will or to sin does not reflect Adam and Eve, it reflects only myself. Had our ancestors been Steve and Suzie, that situation would be no different.

I do not think your opinion of our situation is Catholic teaching. We are not in the same position as Adam and Eve, and Mary is not in our situation or in Adam and Eve’s. Due to original sin, we are not able to avoid every and all sin by our own will. Further our intellects are darkened and we desire sin. Adam and Eve had no such disadvantages, and neither did Mary. Further, Mary is the Coredemptirx and Mediatrix of all grace, so it would seem sin would be next to impossible for her, (if all grace flows through her). And yet, she had free will right? She was surely no robot?

 

[Peter_Plato]

OK yes I suppose that could be true (regarding Mary). I’m not sure this is Catholic teaching, but let’s grant this. In that case, why couldn’t Steve and Suzie also “simply never desire to disobey God’s will?” Since God has created a creature whom he has always and will always know would choose to obey him, why couldn’t he have created our ancestors to be that way?

You don’t understand that someone could, indeed, “never desire to disobey God’s will,” but still choose to do so. It is called a disordered will. The converse is also possible: desiring to disobey God and yet choosing not to. Happens all the time and is a feature of free will.

Paul described the phenomenon in Romans…

For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am of the flesh, sold into slavery under sin.[c] 15 I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good. 17 But in fact it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me.

21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do what is good, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God in my inmost self, 23 but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind, making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, with my mind I am a slave to the law of God, but with my flesh I am a slave to the law of sin.

The nature of sin is precisely its capacity to tear asunder what is done from what is desired, and redemption the repair of will to want, with want being properly ordered to the final good.

I do not think your opinion of our situation is Catholic teaching. We are not in the same position as Adam and Eve, and Mary is not in our situation or in Adam and Eve’s. Due to original sin, we are not able to avoid every and all sin by our own will. Further our intellects are darkened and we desire sin. Adam and Eve had no such disadvantages, and neither did Mary. Further, Mary is the Coredemptirx and Mediatrix of all grace, so it would seem sin would be next to impossible for her, (if all grace flows through her). And yet, she had free will right? She was surely no robot?

Clearly, you don’t really grasp what IS Catholic teaching, following Paul.

Mary is the new Eve and Christ the new Adam.
stpeterslist.com/682/6-biblical-reasons-mary-is-the-new-eve/

 

[PRmerger]

We can have a debate about whether your conception of what constitutes “church teaching” is supported by the church’s own proclamations or even coherent, but I don’t think this is the appropriate place. Certainly for another thread. Further, we can debate whether or not the doctrine of the immaculate conception is in fact a “consistent” teaching of the church since its inception, but again, maybe not right here and right now. “Re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic” as some may say.

Let’s return to the topic at hand. Here are some simple questions, just to help me better understand your position:

1. Do you consider Mary equivalent to Adam and Eve in terms of the grace given to them by God? Were Adam and Eve created immaculately?
2. Did God’s gift of grace to Mary merely enable her to avoid every and all sin throughout her life, or did it “preserve” her from every and all sins throughout life? What constitutes this preservation (if it is such)? If it is merely the act of her will, how is she spiritually different than any other human being?
3. Can a normal human being born in original sin avoid all and every other sin by his or her own choice?

Depending upon your answers, we may get some insight here I think. What I have noticed on this thread is that many posters seem to be positing various theories that are not in harmony with a Catholic conception of grace, original sin, free will, divine omniscience, etc. There are reasonable answers here, but they aren’t Catholic Answers. Ha just a little joke…

All of the above doesn’t answer a single question I posed in my response.

You make it clear through this that you made some claims which were made out of supreme ignorance.

You have no examples of “many” ECFs, saints, theologians who dissented from the CC and claim that Mary was born with Original Sin.

 

[Gorgias]

Well, well… The answer is very simple, but your side doesn’t like it. God could have created Steve and Susie, with full free will, and no desire to disobey. This comes from omnipotence. Not creating the “loser” couple, and instead of them creating the “winner” couple, the whole original sin would have been eliminated. No fall, no sin, no CURSE, no problem, and of course no need for a redeemer. We would all be sinless

Erm… no. You misunderstand the point of ‘original sin’. It’s not that we sin because Adam and Eve did; it’s that Adam and Eve sinned and also so do we. Whether or not there was a ‘loser’ couple, humans with free will choose to sin (for that matter, even if there could be a ‘winner couple’, we still would choose sin). In fact, you have no reason to suspect that there could be a ‘Steve and Susie’ – just a vague combinatorics notion that it’s mathematically possible. That doesn’t equate to a proof that it’s necessarily possible. (Guanilo already disproved your thought: just because you can conceive of a created thing – the ‘island greater than any other’ – doesn’t mean that it possibly exists. (Guanilo just over-reached and presumed that since it held for created things, it also held for uncreated things.))

But of course, reason and logic cannot conquer “blind faith”.

On the other hand, you’re not even providing logic that conquers faith that sees clearly.

So the answer is this, in simple terms: "God could have created Steve and Susie, and there would be no original sin, no fall, no curse, no problem… Why he did not do it, we don’t know. But we can make an educated guess. The solution of “no sin, etc.” is obviously preferable IF God really wanted everyone to be in heaven. So God did NOT want everyone to be in heaven.

You haven’t demonstrated your premise, so attempting to arrive at a conclusion based on it is illogical.

 

[tonyrey]

Pallas, with all due respect, did you even read the post I quoted?

You are erroneously looking at God creating Adam and Eve through a timeline. It is not as if God was existing for several thousand years and then decided “Hey, I want to make people. Hmm… If I make Adam and Eve, they’re going to eventually disobey me and throw the rest of my creation into chaos through the abuse of their free will… Maybe I should make Steve and Suzie instead because they won’t… Nahh! Adam and Eve it is!”

That’s absurd. For one, God exists outside of time. He created time. It’s not as if he is able to see the future and control time, saw what would happen, and then went through with it anyway. He created the time we experience. He is not subject to it. If He willed to create Adam and Eve, He knew what they would do. He also knew what their children would do, and their children after that, all the way down to the present day and even further past it into what is our future, but not His future. All is present for God. Not in the present, just present. All that is, is for God, because the only reason it can even exist is through Him.

In God’s mind, the fact that Adam and Eve would disobey is not a sufficient reason to refrain from their creation, in part because through their creation, every human being to ever exist, including Jesus and Mary, were brought into being. In creating Adam and Eve, God created every other human being who has ever existed and will ever exist. One mistake was not sufficient to deprive the rest of humanity of it’s existence. Why didn’t God create Steve and Suzie instead? Because He wanted us to have free will. He wills all of us to choose Heaven. He does not will all of us to be forced into Heaven. The problem here is that, in asserting that everyone should have been made in such a way that, despite being given the option to disobey, never would, you disregard the fact that this effectively robs people of their free will. They will never have the desire to disobey because that is how they were made. Thus it will never happen.

Mary was not, in fact, *made *in such a way that she would never desire to disobey. She simply never desired to disobey God’s will. That was her choice and her choice alone. God did not decide for her. Unlike Adam and Eve, when God asked Mary to do something, she obeyed. They did not.

The problem at hand is not the fact that Adam and Eve were somehow imperfect while Mary was more perfect, and that Steve and Suzie would have also been more perfect that Adam and Eve. They would have been literally no different. We have the exact same options that Mary had and that Adam and Eve had and that every other human in history has ever had. Give of oneself and serve God’s will out of love, or assert one’s own will over God’s. Not only do we have the same options, we have the same ability to choose one or the other. The only reason Adam and Eve’s sin was even important is because it passed the state of Original Sin onto the rest of humanity. Other than that, their actions have no real bearing on our own decisions. At the end of the day, what I choose is not your choice, or Mary’s, or Steve’s, or Adam’s, or my parents’. It is mine. Whether I choose to do God’s will or to sin does not reflect Adam and Eve, it reflects only myself. Had our ancestors been Steve and Suzie, that situation would be no different.

:clapping: A superb post!

 

[Kurisu35712]

Would you say that God is ignorant of alternative possibilities? Sometimes called “future conditionals.” Or, do you say that God doesn’t know what would happen, only what does happen?

Aww dang it, I had a huge post written out and it got deleted. I’ll try to replicate it as best I can. I have two paragraphs that are essentially saying the same thing in different ways as I thought through the question. I’m going to give my condensed answer and leave the absurdly long thought process I had that brought me to it so that you can see how I arrived at this conclusion, because it’s even confusing me, and I’m the one who wrote it. Hopefully someone can explain it back to me.

God exists at all points in time. Time is relative to our physical universe, and our physical universe is relative to time. God created both the physical universe and time, and He continues to will for existence as we know it to exist. But God is not subject to time, or part of time. Time is a creation and a part of God, like everything else in our reality. There is no “this can happen” from God’s perspective, or even “this will happen if.” It is or is not because He wills it so.

God cannot be ignorant of alternative possibilities. But there is a flaw in how this is presented. We, as humans, not only make decisions based on our present situation, but also on our rationally determined predictions of what our actions will result in. God does not have predictions. He already knows all that is, in an eternal sense. Which is not quite in the sense that they already happened. It’s hard to describe. We make predictions. God does not make predictions. I feel like this first question is asking if God was aware, before creating Adam and Eve, whether two different individuals would have chosen differently. I do not think we can interpret reality like that. This seems to ask whether God has knowledge of alternate timelines in a sense. I don’t think that’s a legitimate question. I don’t think alternative possibilities with regards to universal existence are a thing. What exists is what exists. I don’t think potentials can be said to exist, as they would be actual if they did. Not that God does not have knowledge of them, but rather, God’s knowledge is what existence itself is dependent on.

The way I’m reading this question, you’re asking if God knew before creating Adam and Eve what the results of their creation would be, and knowing that, what the results would be if He were to instead create different individuals who made different choices. God is omniscient. He knows everything. But there is an issue in the way we understand this, and the way we understand “knowing.” For us, knowledge is something we acquire. Knowledge is something we possess. God does not acquire knowledge. God’s knowledge is existence itself. God does not know something because it exists or because it happens, it exists because He knows it, in a sense. It’s really hard to explain what I’m trying to say. For example, if there is a rock on my desk, God doesn’t know that because it’s there, the reason it’s able to be there at all is *because *He knows of it in the first place. God’s knowledge is existence itself. And more important to my point, God is omnipresent. God is present at all places and all points in time, because God’s will is what enables those points to exist at all. One cannot say there is a place where God is not present, because that is backwards. It is not that this space is nonexistent, so God is not there, but rather, God is not there, so it is nonexistent. Nothing in this universe exists without God, because He created it and sustains it.

God cannot know what will happen. He exists out of time, and is not subject to it. Nothing can happen in the future for God, because He is already there, and here, and in the past, and outside of the realm of time entirely. It’s not accurate to phrase the question as whether God can only know what does happen, because that implies that there are potential things that God does not know, only because they aren’t actually real. Instead of eating Nutella on toast for dinner tonight, I could have potentially cooked the frozen shrimp in the freezer. But I ate Nutella on toast for dinner. God technically had to have known that I *could *have chosen to eat shrimp tonight, from a human perspective, because there were shrimp and cooking techniques available and I thought about doing so. But at the same time, as well as before tonight, and twenty years in the future from my perspective, He also knows that I decided to eat Nutella on toast. Nothing can potentially happen in the future for God. Nothing can “will happen” from His perspective. Everything is.

And since my original post was literally over 9000 characters, I’ve split the post in half. Continued…

 

[Kurisu35712]

… Now!

Can you please clarify by what reason the hypothetical obedient ancestors would not have free will if they happened to obey? I truly don’t understand, and I think I’m not alone. This would benefit all. Please spell it out.

Part of the reason Steve and Suzie do not have free will is because we are the ones creating them. We have conceptualized a universe where Steve and Suzie do not disobey God because they never want to disobey God. But the only reason they do not want to disobey is because we do not want them to disobey, because we wish that Adam and Eve did not disobey. Steve and Suzie obviously did not happen, because we live in the world we live in and not the hypothetical one that would result from their obedience. But because hindsight is 20/20, we realize that Adam and Eve’s mistake was unfair to us, their children. We look back and see that they made a mistake, and can say that, had they only obeyed God in the first place, these problems wouldn’t exist.

Steve and Suzie are not humans with free will, and never were. They are hypothetical humans we have conceptualized to fix the mistakes of those who came before us. They are extensions of our will.

OK yes I suppose that could be true (regarding Mary). I’m not sure this is Catholic teaching, but let’s grant this. In that case, why couldn’t Steve and Suzie also “simply never desire to disobey God’s will?” Since God has created a creature whom he has always and will always know would choose to obey him, why couldn’t he have created our ancestors to be that way?

He did create our ancestors to be that way. But they chose differently from Mary. God created Mary, who chooses to always obey Him. But Mary is the one who makes the choice to obey. They desired to disobey God. They were not made for that purpose or for that desire, but were given the free will to make that determination on their own. God can, did, does, and will until the last human create people who have the potential to always choose to obey His will and never desire to go against Him. But He does not determine the choice they will make. God preferring us to never disobey obviously does not stop us from disobeying Him. God did not determine any choice Mary made at any point in her life. God did not determine any choice I have made over the course of my life. The simple fact is, while Mary chose at every point to obey, I have not. Adam and Eve did not. Why couldn’t the ancestors we ended up with have simply chosen to obey?

I do not think your opinion of our situation is Catholic teaching. We are not in the same position as Adam and Eve, and Mary is not in our situation or in Adam and Eve’s. Due to original sin, we are not able to avoid every and all sin by our own will. Further our intellects are darkened and we desire sin. Adam and Eve had no such disadvantages, and neither did Mary. Further, Mary is the Coredemptirx and Mediatrix of all grace, so it would seem sin would be next to impossible for her, (if all grace flows through her). And yet, she had free will right? She was surely no robot?

That sentence is not entirely accurate. Due to our own desire to act independently from God’s will, we cannot avoid every an all sin. Original sin is the result of humans trying to exist apart from God, which we cannot do. We cannot exist without God. We cannot avoid sin on our own because we cannot truly live on our own at all. We cannot do good apart from God. We cannot love others without God. The reason Mary was able to remain free from sin is because she chose to remain at all times with God. The reason Adam and Eve failed to avoid sin was because in disobeying Him they tried to exist apart from Him.

Adam and Eve were no more capable of avoiding sin by their own will than any of us are, but that’s not the point. Had they loved God and trusted in Him as they were asked to, they would have never sinned in the first place. The point of our lives is not to remain free from sin. The point of our lives is to love God and recognize that He loves us more than we can ever comprehend, even with all of eternity to try. One result of doing this is our will being aligned with God’s. Another result of following this purpose perfectly is remaining free from sin. God does not even ask us to follow this perfectly, merely to try with all of our hearts to love Him, and frankly, we know whether or not we are doing our best. There is only one Blessed Virgin, but every saint and Saint in Heaven accomplished what God asked of them.

 

[Kurisu35712]

Can you please clarify by what reason the hypothetical obedient ancestors would not have free will if they happened to obey? I truly don’t understand, and I think I’m not alone. This would benefit all. Please spell it out.

I honestly wish I had a better or clearer answer than what I wrote, but I’m only 21 and I’m only an architecture student. I barely have answers to job interview questions.

If they obeyed of their own accord because they wanted to then Steve and Suzie had free will, and also aligned their will with God’s. But in this situation, they are not Adam and Eve. They exist in a universe in which God decided to create humans like ours, but there is also the condition in this universe that they do not and will not ever have the desire to go against God’s will.

This was not their desire. This was a criteria placed on their hypothetical universe. Adam and Eve could have never desired to go against God’s will. They could have never listened to a talking snake. They could have listened to a talking snake, realized he was speaking nonsense, and chosen to disregard his temptations. They could have done exactly what they did. Eve could have listened to the snake, eaten the fruit, tell Adam to eat some too so that she wasn’t the only one, and then have him refuse, and then tell God that Eve offered him the forbidden fruit.

They could have both eaten it, realized that they should not have eaten it at all, and then instead of running and hiding, gone up to God and told Him that they disobeyed and ate the fruit, but that they were sorry and would accept whatever punishment they were given.

Or, they could have listened to a talking snake, eat an expressly forbidden fruit, run away and hide, and then when confronted say that she made me do it, and then the snake made me do it, and then result in exactly what we have today. I don’t know why they chose this option, which is by far the worst out of all of them from our perspective. But God decided to let them go into the world and pick an option. This is the one they came up with.

 

[Bradski]

All I can say is…thanks Kurisu for putting so much time and effort into this. I think if I’d lost all that I’m not sure I could have made a second attempt.

Having said that, I think that you’d agree that whatever world we find ourselves in, whatever happens, is the best ‘as far as God is concerned’. I think that that is blazingly obvious and incontrovertible. What happens cannot be God’s Plan B.

Yet, and this is the zinger, if He can’t come up with a better answer to whatever question is being asked when families are gunned down then He doesn’t appear to me to be omnipotent. Butt God cannot exist without His being omnipotent, so there is only one conclusion to which I can come.

 

[tonyrey]

All I can say is…thanks Kurisu for putting so much time and effort into this. I think if I’d lost all that I’m not sure I could have made a second attempt.

Having said that, I think that you’d agree that whatever world we find ourselves in, whatever happens, is the best ‘as far as God is concerned’. I think that that is blazingly obvious and incontrovertible. What happens cannot be God’s Plan B.

Yet, and this is the zinger, if He can’t come up with a better answer to whatever question is being asked when families are gunned down then He doesn’t appear to me to be omnipotent. Butt God cannot exist without His being omnipotent, so there is only one conclusion to which I can come.

“appear” is the keyword. Can you explain how all atrocities can be prevented without turning us into zombies?

 

[Gorgias]

Yet, and this is the zinger, if He can’t come up with a better answer to whatever question is being asked when families are gunned down then He doesn’t appear to me to be omnipotent. Butt God cannot exist without His being omnipotent, so there is only one conclusion to which I can come.

That the error of your logic is that what ‘appears to you’ must not be the end-all and be-all answer, and only God knows the wisdom of His divine plan? Yes, I agree.

 

[PRmerger]

Having said that, I think that you’d agree that whatever world we find ourselves in, whatever happens, is the best ‘as far as God is concerned’. I think that that is blazingly obvious and incontrovertible. What happens cannot be God’s Plan B.

This is not a correct articulation of the Catholic view, Brad.

There’s a difference between God’s antecedent will, and God’s consequent will. The antecedent will is, essentially and inevitably, fulfilled. The consequent will, however, is that which has its origins in our choices.

 

[PRmerger]

“appear” is the keyword. Can you explain how all atrocities can be prevented without turning us into zombies?

I simply don’t think it’s possible.

 

[Bradski]

That the error of your logic is that what ‘appears to you’ must not be the end-all and be-all answer, and only God knows the wisdom of His divine plan.

His plan, obviously as it appears to me - I am not omniscient, is, in many instances, shockingly, appallingly, horrifyingly inept.

The thing is, it obviously appears to you - you not being omniscient either, exactly the same. How could it be any different? Unless you can see some good coming from families being massacred. In which case, I’m all ears.

Failing that, we both feel the same. But it seems that I draw different, and to me, very obvious, conclusions.

 

[Bradski]

This is not a correct articulation of the Catholic view, Brad.

There’s a difference between God’s antecedent will, and God’s consequent will. The antecedent will is, essentially and inevitably, fulfilled. The consequent will, however, is that which has its origins in our choices.

Well I’m so glad that someone has brought this up. I can’t understand why no-one has before. Quite possible because it’s irrelevant. This is either the way things are meant to be or not. There are no options, PR. This is the way it was always going to be.

There are no surprises as far as God is concerned. It is written. He has already decided. Your life is already decided. You make the decisions, but they are already made as far as God is concerned. It is writen. Whatever the reason for an apparently mindless massacre of innocents, and it cannot appear as anything other than mindless because we are not omniscient, it is written.

It makes no sense for a very basic and understandable reason: It really does make no sense.

 

[PRmerger]

Well I’m so glad that someone has brought this up. I can’t understand why no-one has before. Quite possible because it’s irrelevant. This is either the way things are meant to be or not.

This is NOT the way things are meant to be.

“As it was in the beginning…” was ruined by A and E.

“From the beginning it was not so…”

God had to correct it by the Incarnation.

That’s the central element of Christianity.

There are no options, PR. This is the way it was always going to be.

Again, you are not correctly articulating the Catholic position, so please refrain from saying, “I think that you’d agree that whatever world we find ourselves in, whatever happens, is the best ‘as far as God is concerned’. I think that that is blazingly obvious and incontrovertible.”

No Catholic ought to be agreeing with you on that.

There are no surprises as far as God is concerned.

True, dat.

It is written.

Nope.

He has already decided

But *we *haven’t.

 

[Bradski]

But *we *haven’t.

Already decided? Ah, but we only live in this little sliver of time. God is fully aware of your ‘future’ decisions. He being in the EN.

You can’t have it both ways.

 

[PRmerger]

Already decided? Ah, but we only live in this little sliver of time. God is fully aware of your ‘future’ decisions. He being in the EN.

You can’t have it both ways.

Why are you creating a dichotomy where there is none?

God knows, in the EN (which, BTW, you’ve read now in Aquinas, yes?)

But we don’t live in the EN. We live in a specific point on the timeline.

And are you in agreement now that the Catholic view is that this way is NOT the way it was meant to be? God had to correct it by the Incarnation?

 

[Aloysium]

Bradski;13082254-:

. . . if He can’t come up with a better answer to whatever question is being asked when families are gunned down then He doesn’t appear to me to be omnipotent. Butt God cannot exist without His being omnipotent, so there is only one conclusion to which I can come.

In such circumstances, God is actually our only true consolation:
“Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.”

While God cannot make it all go away, make it that it never happened, this does not make Him less than omnipotent. It makes reality rational.

So what good is a God if He cannot bring back those whom we love, to allow them to live the life to which they were entitled and had stolen from them?

What helps is to realize that God is with us in our suffering, that we are not alone. He and His holy Mother know too well what we are going through.
To have faith in God is to realize that regardless of the immensity of the loss and the ensuing despair, it will be alright.

In contrast to the Commandments which revealed those actions that separate us from God, the Beatitudes, given to us by Jesus when He came down from the mountain, offer us a vision of God’s kingdom and spur us on to live a hopeful life of love in faith.

 

[tonyrey]

His plan, obviously as it appears to me - I am not omniscient, is, in many instances, shockingly, appallingly, horrifyingly inept.

The thing is, it obviously appears to you - you not being omniscient either, exactly the same. How could it be any different? Unless you can see some good coming from families being massacred. In which case, I’m all ears.

Failing that, we both feel the same. But it seems that I draw different, and to me, very obvious, conclusions.

It is unrealistic to expect good to come from every event when we have the power to reach different conclusions. If our minds were chained it would be a fate worse than death. We can’t have it both ways…