S
Sophia
Guest
Of course not. The problem is that people confuse “ethics” and “meta-ethics”… and they think that they are the “cat’s whiskers”.
- Status
T
tweedlealice
Guest
OK!
We live in a Natural & a Supernatural world. When you look horizontally, you see the problems and trials in the world.
Now, some get so overwhelmed w the horrors that can greet us, that they stop looking for answered prayer. It isn’t a 1:1 ratio event. It is troublesome BUT,
in our Spiritual world, there are reasons we must take this journey. God looks at our soul, not the body. What will it take in life, for you to chose a path, that will bring you home to the FATHER, that is ever calling you??
Are we proud? Do we need pruning? Have we suffered much for His sake, and we need healing this time.
Not a lot of studies. Some theologians think you can’t empirically study prayer.
“Some studies on subjective well-being and personal effects of prayer have shown positive effects on the individual who prays” quote.
I’ve laid hands on the Aura/Spirit of a person.
My gift was to decrease or remove pain. Effective ~45%of the time. God released a guys frozen shoulder!! WOW! Thank You, Jesus.
God is! Prayers are answered according to our Souls need.
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice
We live in a Natural & a Supernatural world. When you look horizontally, you see the problems and trials in the world.
Now, some get so overwhelmed w the horrors that can greet us, that they stop looking for answered prayer. It isn’t a 1:1 ratio event. It is troublesome BUT,
in our Spiritual world, there are reasons we must take this journey. God looks at our soul, not the body. What will it take in life, for you to chose a path, that will bring you home to the FATHER, that is ever calling you??
Are we proud? Do we need pruning? Have we suffered much for His sake, and we need healing this time.
Not a lot of studies. Some theologians think you can’t empirically study prayer.
“Some studies on subjective well-being and personal effects of prayer have shown positive effects on the individual who prays” quote.
I’ve laid hands on the Aura/Spirit of a person.
My gift was to decrease or remove pain. Effective ~45%of the time. God released a guys frozen shoulder!! WOW! Thank You, Jesus.
God is! Prayers are answered according to our Souls need.
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice
S
Sophia
Guest
A 45% success rate would be phenomenal, if you could perform it under proper, controlled circumstances. Unfortunately there are many people with a lot of suffering, so you could do a lot of good.
B
Bradskii
Guest
Now I know why all those people were killed in Guatemala. God was off fixing some guy’s shoulder.tweedlealice:
A 45% success rate would be phenomenal, if you could perform it under proper, controlled circumstances. Unfortunately there are many people with a lot of suffering, so you could do a lot of good.
L
laylow
Guest
Mysterious ways…
S
Sophia
Guest
Unfortunately he did not fix Mohamed Salah’s shoulder. Salah is an Egyptian soccer player, currently playing in Liverpool. During the Champion League final he was fouled by Sergio Ramos of Real Madrid (probably a good Catholic). With Salah injured, Liverpool lost the game. If God had fixed his injured shoulder, the game would have been different… but I guess, God is not concerned with the shoulder of an Infidel Muslim…
A
Aloysium
Guest
I’d be interested in knowing how you think fixing his shoulder would prepare this fellow for eternity. Most of us find Christ through our suffering. Winning lotteries can be the worst thing that can happen, and conversely when things go wrong, they actually are taking a turn towards the truly good, which transcends the transient and illusory goods of this world. As to calling him an infedel Muslim, you should be aware that God loves all of us and that justice takes into consider ignorance.
B
Bradskii
Guest
I watched the game. Packed pub all rootin’ for Liverpool. In Wales as it turns out. Then Bale hit that shot and we all just went…wow.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
That darned free moral agency… It’s a shame only half the compass is warm and fuzzy.
I guess we’d prefer the theoretical God turned us into Stepford-style automatons?
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Might we be thinking of “goodness” in a purely human way?
G
Gorgias
Guest
No… it’s the moral code that claims “there is no absolute moral code” – in other words, it’s the moral code that says “each does as he sees fit.” That’s a positive statement (and an absolute one, to boot!), and not just a bald head.
Ooh! Nice distinction! No difference there, though, unfortunately. Even if there were, it would still be an absolute statement about ethics, (which creates a self-referential paradox).
P
PickyPicky
Guest
I would not have suspected you of moral relativism.
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Again, though, we have to get the Christian story right:
Regardless of whether Christians believe that creation was corrupted after the Fall (as more fundamentalist and literalstic types do), or that creation always included decay, death, pain and other natural evils (as I do), the Christian tradition agrees that this world is not what God ultimately has in store. Creation now is not all there is or will be (and how naive of us to think the world of our senses encompasses all reality!) There will be a “New Jerusalem,” or a “New Heaven and New Earth.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church states the the current created order is in a state of “journeying” towards its ultimate goal. All of these images are saying the same thing: That in Christ, all of creation will be renewed.
Just because present pain and evil, in itself, sometimes seems arbitrary and even excessive does not mean that is really the case.
Regardless of whether Christians believe that creation was corrupted after the Fall (as more fundamentalist and literalstic types do), or that creation always included decay, death, pain and other natural evils (as I do), the Christian tradition agrees that this world is not what God ultimately has in store. Creation now is not all there is or will be (and how naive of us to think the world of our senses encompasses all reality!) There will be a “New Jerusalem,” or a “New Heaven and New Earth.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church states the the current created order is in a state of “journeying” towards its ultimate goal. All of these images are saying the same thing: That in Christ, all of creation will be renewed.
Just because present pain and evil, in itself, sometimes seems arbitrary and even excessive does not mean that is really the case.
S
Sophia
Guest
That is an incorrect parsing. The lack of “absolute” moral code does not make it “subjective”. You confuse the dichotomy of “absolute-relative” with “objective-subjective”. Absolute moral code would assert that the same ethical system is valid in every society in every time. And it is plainly incorrect.
So there is no difference between physics and metaphysics. No difference between ethics and meta-ethics. no difference between mathematics and meta-mathematics. I wonder why would we be so adamant in nitpicking and make such “irrelevant” distinctions.
A statement ABOUT ethics is NOT an ethical proposition - and as such it cannot be self-referential.
A statement ABOUT physics is NOT a physical proposition - and as such it cannot be self-referential.
A statement ABOUT mathematics is NOT a mathematical proposition - and as such it cannot be self-referential.
Sorry, my friend. You really need to study what you wish to argue about. Because all you display here is your ignorance. Now, ignorance is not a problem - per se. The problem is digging in your heels and refuse to learn.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Ah, the old charge of ignorance. Never gets tired on these forums…
P
PickyPicky
Guest
OK, I understand that. God has created this in-between subsidiary world. And he has made it full of suffering. As far as animal life is concerned, not just full of suffering, but powered by suffering. Seems to me evidence against your goodness theory.
S
Sophia
Guest
And if you cannot present an epistemological method to separate the “seemingly” excessive and the “really” excessive pain and suffering, we must rely on the “duck principle”. We use this wonderful principle in every facet of life. You wish to make an exception for God. And that is called “special pleading”, another well-known error.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Saying that pain and suffering are part of the biological reality of which animals form part is different from saying animal life is equated to a life of pain and suffering. Animal life includes pain and suffering, but it is hardly defined by it.
A
Aloysium
Guest
Actually, we created this in the sense that we brought evil into the world through our original sin. Of course God creates all time and space, so unltimately it serve His purposes. We were made to become Love, and we can do so now, through and in Jesus Christ, each of us having this one second chance not to remain in what would have been a hell, had we not been granted death. Animals are part of nature and give their lives over to nature that it may grow, flourish and diversify. Whatever individual suffering they may experience, suffering and pain strictly not being synonymous, came as a consequence of our decision to place the self, other than God, Divine Love itself, at the centre of the garden that represents our relationship with all that is. The damage done at the beginning occurred where each individual now emerges as part of the eternal Now and therefore affects all time and space. We as the crown of creation, being the reason why this universe was brought into being, to know and glorify God, made our mark on all of it.
Something like that.
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
The Christian has prior reasons to identify God’s goodness.
So there is no reason why a Christian must identify every particular evil or suffering and attempt to prove the “greater good” that flows from such evil.
We know from philosophical reasoning that God is Goodness itself.
We know from Revelation that God is Love. From this is follows that we do not need to know the purpose of suffering in every case.
So there is no reason why a Christian must identify every particular evil or suffering and attempt to prove the “greater good” that flows from such evil.
We know from philosophical reasoning that God is Goodness itself.
We know from Revelation that God is Love. From this is follows that we do not need to know the purpose of suffering in every case.
Last edited:
- Status