I am baffled, please explain

[Gorgias]

1. The RCC teaches explicitly that God sustains our soul’s existence. (CCC #301)
2. The RCC teaches explicitly that our souls are directly created by God. (CCC # 366)
3. The RCC teaches explicitly that our souls are immortal. (CCC #366)

However, it seems to me that 3 is not necessarily entailed by 1 and 2, and is rather a separate assertion by the RCC.

Perhaps. The human soul is eternal because it is created in the image and likeness of God. (Animal souls… not so much.) Human bodies are not eternal (as created) – we might speculate, since this is not a doctrinal assertion, but plenty of Christian philosophers/theologians have weighed in with their opinions – because the physical is not eternal, and is subject (naturally) to decay / entropy.

For instance, God could choose to cease sustaining our souls, right? If not, then is he not free to do so? If he isn’t free, and couldn’t have done otherwise, should we praise him for doing only that which he could not avoid?

Yes, God could choose to cease sustaining our souls.

If it isn’t an issue of freedom, is it malicious? Could God simply “let us go” but instead chooses to sustain us in torment because he is malicious?

No. You’re setting up a pair of straw men to attempt a refutation regardless which choice we take: ‘God is malicious because he sustains souls in hell’; ‘God is monstrous because He destroys those who do not choose Him’. I answer (in my best Pirsigian voice): ‘mu’. Neither black, nor white; re-ask the question. God is good because He graciously gives life – a gift which He never takes back; God is good because He gives us the choice to freely choose Him or not, and allows us the freedom not only to make the choice but also to have the consequences of our choice.

Is there another possible reason God would sustain us in torment other than he 1) lacks freedom or 2) is malicious?

Of course, and I’ve outlined it above: God sustains us – period. God allows us free will and choice – period. God does not snatch back either of these gifts if He does not like what we do with our lives or our choices.

 

[Peter_Plato]

If it isn’t an issue of freedom, is it malicious? Could God simply “let us go” but instead chooses to sustain us in torment because he is malicious? Is he an “eternally vengeful jilted lover” reminiscent of an omnipotent Elliot Rodger?

It seems to me that you are confusing vengeance with justice.

Imagine the perpetrators of the horrors of Nazi extermination camps during WWII, I would suppose that they would happily accept “simply ‘let us go’” as an appropriate and just response by God to their chosen path of horrifically traumatizing and murdering other human beings, but it is not clear that would be a completely just outcome.

What it all hangs upon is what it ultimately means to be a human being or human person and what possible eternal damage has been done to innocent human persons by those who choose evil. I am not clear that we are in any position to make claims about what is appropriate or just and what exceeds that line into being vengeful or malicious.

Presumably God is in a better position than we are to assess what a just punishment would be given that he alone would be in a position to assess the full harm done by such acts.

Personally, I am willing to grant God that determination with the understanding that the Eternal One who created and sustains all that exists is in a far better position to assess just desserts than we – who know very little in comparison – are.

Sure, it can provide us with some temporary cold comfort to believe the consequences of our actions are limited and fairly benign, and based upon that prior assessment regarding just merits, conclude that we should be permitted to “get away” with a great deal and that it is God who will be malicious and vengeful no matter what we choose to do, but such a position does presume a great deal about the gravity or significance of what we do.

I am not sure I would rely upon such notions, given that we have received what appears to be “fair warning” concerning the significance of our actions.

 

[Pallas_Athene]

God is good because He graciously gives life – a gift which He never takes back; God is good because He gives us the choice to freely choose Him or not, and allows us the freedom not only to make the choice but also to have the consequences of our choice.

A “gift” that no one asked for. He pushes that “gift” on us, whether we want it or not. Let’s just play a hypothetical conversation.
God: Hey, Joe, you don’t exist yet, but soon you will. What say you?
Joe: How can I talk to you when I don’t exist?
God: Oh that is just another “mystery”, a simple manifestation of my omnipotence. Tell me your first impression about coming to existence.
Joe: I have none - yet. Could you please tell me what my existence will look like?
God: Sure. I know everything, past, present and future. You future is rather interesting. In your childhood you will get some presently incurable disease, which will confine you to a wheelchair, and you will experience some serious pain until you die. Also you will fall to temptation and commit some offense to Me, namely you will abuse the wonderful gift of having procreative parts. So when you die, some very nasty demons will come grab your “soul” and you will be tortured forever. That is the loving and merciful result of your disobedience.
Joe: Is this already predetermined? Can I have a different existence?
God: I suppose you could, but I am not in the mood to negotiate.
Joe: Well, in that case I would respectfully decline this “existence”. I would rather not be created at all.
God: That is out of question. You will exist as I described. And remember, I love you more than you will ever know! Bye! Whooosh… and Joe gets created.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . I’m always right because, well, that’s just how I am. It’s part of my nature to always be right. If I’m not always right, then I’m not me. Simple. #slamdunkargument

You later state:

. . . OK I need to stop. I have other things to do. I can’t keep arguing with people on the interwebs. . .

Your time would be better spent listening.

This is not a matter of being right, but of finding the truth.

Most of us are here to help one another in this journey.
While it may appear that your approach detracts from this,
as it turns out, taking your comments seriously
provides an opportunity to organize one’s thoughts and reaffirm one’s faith.

Thank you.

 

[PRmerger]

A “gift” that no one asked for. He pushes that “gift” on us, whether we want it or not.

 

[Aloysium]

A “gift” that no one asked for. He pushes that “gift” on us, whether we want it or not. Let’s just play a hypothetical conversation.

God: Hey, Joe, you don’t exist yet, but soon you will. What say you?
Joe: How can I talk to you when I don’t exist?. . .
​

If someone is constantly inventing scenarios and/or engaging in hypotheticals, they will never get beyond their subjective imagination, especially when they fail to listen to responses.

God exists in every moment as its Father.
He is creating/maintaining our existence in this moment.
He guides us in this moment.
He is in every single moment that has existed before this time.
He will exist in every moment after this.
He is One in every single moment, transcending time.
He is beyond time.

Read what I bolded from your quote.
How is anyone supposed to take you seriously?
So, you are saying that you had an opinion before you existed.
Your hypothetical Joe gets it. How can you not?

God gave you life to make what you will of it.
Do not squander the opportunity.
I have seen more than my share of dying persons.
Those who embraced life, seemed to embrace death to its fullest and left in peace.​

 

[Lion_IRC]

mamlukman:

…But I agree–since we don’t KNOW much about God, it’s a lot of speculation. What if God deliberately decided not to peek at the future that was affected by free will?

Then that wouldn’t be God. Because that being would have a deficiency in knowledge, and by definition, God cannot have any deficiencies.

I think you are mistakenly conflating deliberate inaction with inability.

I agree that inability or incapacity to act would be a deficiency. But that’s not what mamlukman is suggesting. We are talking about God’s divine prerogative.

If we think of God as timeless, existing in an eternal “now”, isn’t it possible that God’s ability to know something about (what we call) the future is akin to His ability to remember something from the past? It’s His choice.

Sure, you can argue that God - by definition - is necessarily able to immediately think about, and be mindful of, all events that have ever happened going back into infinity and simultaneously do the same in relation to every future event that will ever happen to any being that will ever exist anywhere in any possible universe/multiverse that God may choose to create - but why does an ALL powerful being NEED to bother with such irrelevant details unless He wants to?

Suppose a loving child wanted to give Jesus a Christmas present and so they gift wrap it and put it under the Christmas tree. Then, on Christmas morning, full of anticipation they hand it to Jesus and watch as He unwraps the gift.

Does Jesus already ‘know’ what the gift is? Does He ‘act’ surprised and ‘pretend’ to be delighted when He sees what’s inside the wrapping paper?

I say, yes, of course Jesus can deliberately wait until Christmas Day to open His present and then find out what it is.

ETA - see how I substituted the word God and used the word Jesus to make the surprise gift-giving analogy? I did that on purpose because, as Christians discussing logical possibilities and impossibilities insofar as God’s nature, we should be mindful that some people say it is logically impossible for God to have a Son.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . If we think of God as timeless, existing in an eternal “now”, isn’t it possible that God’s ability to know something about (what we call) the future is akin to His ability to remember something from the past? It’s His choice… . .

This moment is alive, real, immediate, it has being.
It exists because its being is brought into existence from the Foundation, which is God eternal.
God is in every moment as its Source.
Nothing can exist without His bringing it into being in its moment and place.
Every moment is alive, real, and immediate.
God reliquishes His omnipotence to us that we may participate in our own creation.
Free will allows us the capacity to love, to give ourselves back to our Creator, whose spirit is in all of us.

:twocents:

 

[PRmerger]

I think you are mistakenly conflating deliberate inaction with inability.

I agree that inability or incapacity to act would be a deficiency. But that’s not what mamlukman is suggesting. We are talking about God’s divine prerogative.

If we think of God as timeless, existing in an eternal “now”, isn’t it possible that God’s ability to know something about (what we call) the future is akin to His ability to remember something from the past? It’s His choice.

Yes. This is a good example. Atheists often like to pose some variation of this by asking if God can fail to remember something in the past.

And the answer, consistently, is the same as the answer we have posed to you: no, God cannot forget. Even were He to choose to do so, He could not because that would be a deficit.

And God, by nature, cannot have deficits.

So even if your god chooses not know something in the future, what that means is that this being is not God, because a hypothetical being could exist that does know this future event.

And ***that ***Being is…God.

 

[Lion_IRC]

Yes. This is a good example. Atheists often like to pose some variation of this by asking if God can fail to remember something in the past.

Well that would be obfuscation on the part of the atheist then.
Failure is not a deliberate choice, it is the inability to do what one attempts. (Tried/failed.)
Nobody is arguing that God might fail to know.

…And the answer, consistently, is the same as the answer we have posed to you: no, God cannot forget.

With all due respect, you are equivocating here.
God can remember/know anything anytime.
He would never be unable to remember - ie. I forgot what I had for dinner last Tuesday.

…Even were He to choose to do so, He could not because that would be a deficit.

A computer doesn’t ‘forget’ stuff. We control the way it stores and retrieves data (information, knowledge, facts.) We choose when to access information from the computer’s ‘memory’. Do you claim that God has no choice in how He uses His infinite data base?

…And God, by nature, cannot have deficits.

I agree. That’s fundamental to the definition of omnipotence.
But I just don’t see how anything God chooses to do (or not to do) can be described as a ‘deficit’.

…So even if your god chooses not know something in the future, what that means is that this being is not God, because a hypothetical being could exist that does know this future event.

Once again, you are not comparing like with like.
The extent to which a hypothetical being can know something about the future is limited to its God-given ability to know. If God - the Creator reveals a future fact to such a (created) hypothetical being then God knew that fact first.
So for a hypothetical being such as yours to “brag” about knowing something God doesn’t know would not be strictly true since God could - at any time - draw on His all powerful memory bank of past and future events and nullify the claim that God doesnt have that knowledge.

Moreover, God could erase the memory which that hypothetical being had and take away its previously revealed knowledge.

Bruce Almighty. (2003)
Gotcha moment. Trying to trick God…behind your back…how many fingers am I holding up, etc.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[PRmerger]

But I just don’t see how anything God chooses to do (or not to do) can be described as a ‘deficit’.

Because, Lion, even if this god were to choose to forget, or not know, then there exists the possibility of a Being which* does* know and does remember…and that Being, by definition, would be God.

You need to invoke Anselm’s God–He who no greater can be conceived.

Your god, who chooses to forget or not know, would be usurped by My God, who is greater than the one who forgets or doesn’t know.

 

[Lion_IRC]

LOL

Yabbut - your God is unable to do something which mine CAN.

 

[PRmerger]

LOL

Yabbut - your God is unable to do something which mine CAN.

Yes. Your god can forget.

Go for it.

Go worship a god who forgets.

 

[DCNBILL]

A “gift” that no one asked for. He pushes that “gift” on us, whether we want it or not. Let’s just play a hypothetical conversation.
God: Hey, Joe, you don’t exist yet, but soon you will. What say you?
Joe: How can I talk to you when I don’t exist?
God: Oh that is just another “mystery”, a simple manifestation of my omnipotence. Tell me your first impression about coming to existence.
Joe: I have none - yet. Could you please tell me what my existence will look like?
God: Sure. I know everything, past, present and future. You future is rather interesting. In your childhood you will get some presently incurable disease, which will confine you to a wheelchair, and you will experience some serious pain until you die. Also you will fall to temptation and commit some offense to Me, namely you will abuse the wonderful gift of having procreative parts. So when you die, some very nasty demons will come grab your “soul” and you will be tortured forever. That is the loving and merciful result of your disobedience.
Joe: Is this already predetermined? Can I have a different existence?
God: I suppose you could, but I am not in the mood to negotiate.
Joe: Well, in that case I would respectfully decline this “existence”. I would rather not be created at all.
God: That is out of question. You will exist as I described. And remember, I love you more than you will ever know! Bye! Whooosh… and Joe gets created.

It would be absurd to believe that God knows something of what He has not yet created. All He has created is created.

 

[tonyrey]

It would be absurd to believe that God knows something of what He has not yet created. All He has created is created.

It is impossible to know anything about nothing! A non-existent creature is unknowable.

 

[Aloysium]

We have free will.
We can choose to love:

• to will the good for the other
• to not will evil on the other
  and act accordingly.
  We can love or hate.

Creating us in His image, God created beings who are gods.
We have the choice of being gods with or without God, with or without love.
To follow a path of hate or indifference, requires a disconnect from God.
God is Life, Beauty, Joy, Goodness and Truth.
Without God one will fall into emptiness, misery, evil and lies.

God gives us a choice, and we choose freely: to love or not.
Regardless of our choices, there remains is a way out.
We are saved and redeemed through Jesus Christ, the sacrificial Lamb.

God knows who we can be;
he also knows who we become.
These are not always identical.

 

[tonyrey]

Yes, Tonyrey with the save! Thank you for “resurrecting” this thread. It had decayed into dithering about whether or not we are required to believe that which we accept as true.

Now we can have a meaningful dialogue. I believe you have highlighted one of the issues with this question. Maybe God shouldn’t have created us, but isn’t that the most self-destructive and pessimistic philosophy? I will agree, that given a Catholic worldview and eschatology, yes, absolutely evil outweighs good and it is an inexcusable crime for God to have created us if he could have done otherwise (whether he created nothing at all or the perfect world of George and Susie).

However, the Catholic world-view assumes that tons of human beings will undergo endless physical, mental, and spiritual torment forever and forever without relent. In my opinion, I would much rather that no one have ever been created than for even one human being to have to endure this mind-bogglingly horrific fate. If my existence and happiness are predicated upon the necessity of this kind of catastrophic evil, then I cannot accept that my existence is a “good.” If the whole of humanity is predicated on numerous instances of this magnitude of evil, then yes, Schopenhaur is absolutely correct. Existence simply isn’t worth it.

However, if there is no eternal hell and no original sin, if there is no radically evil fate awaiting most of humanity, then I don’t reach the same conclusion. Even with all the evil in the world, we have no reason to suppose that life is not worth living. I can agree that, on the whole, life is a good thing for most human beings in most times and places. There is a tremendous goodness and wonder in life, and we should all embrace it to the fullest extent even though it does come packaged with pain, evil, chaos, and sorrow.

I can accept this:

1. God is all powerful, all good, all knowing.
2. The world is not totally perfect.

But, I can’t accept this:

1. God is all powerful, all good, all knowing.
2. One or more conscious beings are tormented in an endless, relentless hell.

This is just too much unnecessary evil and suffering. It isn’t worth it, not for any us of singularly or all of us collectively.

“are tormented” is incorrect and “torment themselves” is accurate. All our vices incur their own punishment, particularly pride which leads to a lust for power and is inevitably a source of frustration and misery. It is a vicious circle. The more people have the more they want and the more they want the more dissatisfied they become because there is a limit to what they can have. We see plenty of evidence of that in this world…

 

[Lion_IRC]

DCNBILL;13121576:

It would be absurd to believe that God knows something of what He has not yet created. All He has created is created.

It is impossible to know anything about nothing! A non-existent creature is unknowable.

I would be interested to hear what PRmerger thinks of this.
Surely it would be classified as a “deficit” if God had no knowledge or control over that kind of future event.

 

[tonyrey]

You mean, you never pondered a question of “WHAT IF”? I find that hard to believe.

A bizarre question and conclusion considering that my post deals with the implications of a hypothetical paradise on earth.

Was Schopenhauer right in claiming that it would be better if life had never existed on this planet? The OP amounts to a death wish for the entire human race. It implicitly rejects the value of the whole of civilisation from start to finish.

Don’t exaggerate. Pointing out alternate possibilities, which improve the quality of life does not mean a “death wish”.

It amounts to precisely that because if our ancestors didn’t sin they would have been different persons and we wouldn’t exist.

It implies that none of us, including Pallas himself, has the right to exist in view of the crimes of our ancestors. All of us without exception should be denied the gift of life because of what has occurred before we were born.

There is no “right” to exist. We exist because our parents happened to conceive us.

If we have no right to exist there is no reason why we shouldn’t be murdered.

However, if that particular sperm which fused with the ovum would have been a tad slower, this particular “we” would not exist, and someone else would exist in our place. Our genetic makeup (which is not “everything”, but it still is a very important part) is the result of a random event of a huge “horse race” toward the ovum.]

If we exist by chance our lives are valueless, purposeless and meaningless.

Question: “Why are billions of sperms necessary to impregnate one ovum?”
Answer: “Because none of them will stop and ask for directions!”.

Which confirms the fact I have just pointed out.

Does he sincerely believe that evil outweighs everything else?

Your confusion confuses me. I believe the exact opposite, that evil has no value at all, and its elimination would benefit everyone. And I have said it many, many times.

In a universe ruled by chance good and evil are merely human conventions. Remember that you believe we have no right to exist and so murder is not a crime, just a legal fiction to deter people from killing one another.

Regardless of good or evil you believe the suffering in the world outweighs the value of life. Otherwise you wouldn’t choose a hypothetical world where no one sinned and none of the human race would exist. There are no half-measures. Either you accept this world with all its disadvantages or you reject it in favour of your ideal world without the blood-stained history of mankind.

 

[Pallas_Athene]

It would be absurd to believe that God knows something of what He has not yet created. All He has created is created.

It is impossible to know anything about nothing! A non-existent creature is unknowable.

I agree with both of you, but the church does not. Read the dogmas (jloughnan.tripod.com/dogma.htm)

1. God’s knowledge is infinite. (De fide.)
2. God’s knowledge is purely and simply actual.
3. God’s knowledge is subsistent
4. God’s knowledge is comprehensive
5. God’s knowledge is independent of extra-divine things
6. The primary and formal object of the Divine Cognition is God Himself. (Scientia contemplationis)
7. God knows all that is merely possible by the knowledge of simple intelligence (scientia simplicis intelligentiae). (De fide.)
8. God knows all real things in the past, the present and the future (Scientia visionis). (De fide.)
9. By knowledge of vision (scientia visionis) God also foresees the free acts of the rational creatures with infallible certainty. (De fide.)
10. God also knows the conditioned future free actions with infallible certainty (Scientia futuribilium). (Sent. communis.)

Also you can read the bible, where it says (Jeremiah 1:5): “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations”.

Of course if you wish to deny the dogmas and the bible, that is perfectly fine by me.