C
cho_pilo
Guest
I mean, everything and everyone in this Universe is controlled by God.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
- Status
T
tonyrey
Guest
A better analogy is that God is the Director but like all analogies it is inadequate - especially with regard to the Source of Love…
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
Yes, except human freedom.
W
Wesley7
Guest
No, not sure - more likely not…
We (human beings) are not computers or robots. God created all things -(reference)- Nicene Creed.
S
Sacred_Heart_1
Guest
God is the Source of the Universe.
T
Trevor_Stamm
Guest
God is the primary cause of everything, but has chosen to work indirectly through secondary causes. On the subject of unconscious things in nature that show regularities, where the effect is not greater than the cause but moves beyond it always towards a final cause, these things are controlled by an intelligent designer, whom we call God.
Concerning all things outside of God and their ability to exist, “God is in all things; not, indeed, as part of their essence, nor as an accident, but as an agent is present to that upon which it works.” Summa 1.8 a1
B
belorg
Guest
Does it make any difference if, instead of driving a car myself, I use a perfect remote control to steer it, Trevor?
Why does ‘working through secondary causes’ excuse Hom for being the ultimate cause of everything that happens, including bad things, and including every single choice everyone makes.
IOW we are puppets on a string and God is the puppeteer.
T
Trevor_Stamm
Guest
Still trying to argue for Calvinism?
B
belorg
Guest
Still refusing to draw the logical conclusions from your position?
E
empther
Guest
This is the usual atheist deception.
Aquinas clearly states in his writings that no intelligent creature, human or angel, can have thoughts unless God “moves” those thoughts, that is, makes them possible.
Nevertherless, Aquinas clearly explains God doesn’t determine what his creatures’ thoughts are. The creatures themselves determine what to think about, and what activity to persue.
Thus, in the above quote, God is present as agent in the sense that nothing can happen unless he makes it possible, but what creatures choose to do may not be God’s choice.
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
You are still refusing to understand and accept any argument that is contrary to your position. Poor you.
E
empther
Guest
Yeah, I thought so.
Belorg, in the usual atheist manner, took something out of context and gave his own twist on it. :banghead:
Here is the entire paragraph, which you can look up for yourself here:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum011.htm
**
Did you actually believe an atheist would tell the truth?
:bigyikes:
:extrahappy:
Belorg, in the usual atheist manner, took something out of context and gave his own twist on it. :banghead:
Here is the entire paragraph, which you can look up for yourself here:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum011.htm
**
**
Aquinas is saying God is the agent of creation and as this agent he must be present to the created thing at all times or it will disappear. Thus God is present in us as our creative agent. But this has nothing to do with our free will which is our act.
Did you actually believe an atheist would tell the truth?
:bigyikes:
:extrahappy:
B
belorg
Guest
The usual Catholic self-deception and blind adherence to ‘Saint Thomas’.This is the usual atheist deception.
Aquinas clearly states in his writings that no intelligent creature, human or angel, can have thoughts unless God “moves” those thoughts, that is, makes them possible.
Nevertherless, Aquinas clearly explains God doesn’t determine what his creatures’ thoughts are. The creatures themselves determine what to think about, and what activity to persue.
‘The creatures themselves determine what to think about’ is jus about the most incoherent notion thinkable.It is a way to obscure God’s responsibility in the whole process. For which ‘thought’ by a creature determines what the creature will think about?
The whole confusion arises from Aquinas’ desperate attempt to reconcile the deist God of Aristotle with the theist God of christianity. Aristotle’s ‘God’ can be said to merely move the thoughts. Aristotles God is a mover. Aquinas’ God, on the other hand, is a creator. He creates the first thought and hence, determines the whole thought process of every individual creature up to every individual thought.
John Calvin was correct in drawing this inevitable conclsuion.
The problem is that this makes ‘what creatures do’ nobody’s choice.
H
hazmat
Guest
i think he only controls the good stuff. like if you have a really good idea, god inspired you. or if you accomplish something noteworthy, god blessed you. but anything bad that happens, thats all you, buddy.
B
belorg
Guest
Yeah, that sure makes sense.
It’s impossible to do something good without God, but we ca do all other things without God.
A textbook example of special pleading if you ask me.
E
empther
Guest
belorg wrote the following bombastic nonsense, typical of atheists.
Don’t even bother reading it. Just go down to my counterpoint:
COUNTERPOINT; belorg’s bombast is only true if “enabling” is exactly equal to “determining” which clearly is not true.
**You lend your car to your son for the evening. You hope he gets home safely. But if he gets drunk and causes an accident killing himself and 87 other people, you’re not responsible. You enabled. You didn’t determine. **
( Notice that belorg doesn’t use the words “enable” and “determine” because that would make it plain that he’s trying to equate two unequal things. Instead, he talks around the words, arguing enable = determine without saying so explicitly. This is another standard atheist rhetorical trick. )
Don’t even bother reading it. Just go down to my counterpoint:
forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
*This is the usual atheist deception.
*Aquinas clearly states in his writings that no intelligent creature, human or angel, can have thoughts unless God “moves” those thoughts, that is, makes them possible. *
Nevertherless, Aquinas clearly explains God doesn’t determine what his creatures’ thoughts are. The creatures themselves determine what to think about, and what activity to persue.
The usual Catholic self-deception and blind adherence to ‘Saint Thomas’.
‘The creatures themselves determine what to think about’ is jus about the most incoherent notion thinkable.It is a way to obscure God’s responsibility in the whole process. For which ‘thought’ by a creature determines what the creature will think about?
The whole confusion arises from Aquinas’ desperate attempt to reconcile the deist God of Aristotle with the theist God of christianity. Aristotle’s ‘God’ can be said to merely move the thoughts. Aristotles God is a mover. Aquinas’ God, on the other hand, is a creator. He creates the first thought and hence, determines the whole thought process of every individual creature up to every individual thought.
John Calvin was correct in drawing this inevitable conclsuion.
The problem is that this makes ‘what creatures do’ nobody’s choice.
COUNTERPOINT; belorg’s bombast is only true if “enabling” is exactly equal to “determining” which clearly is not true.
**You lend your car to your son for the evening. You hope he gets home safely. But if he gets drunk and causes an accident killing himself and 87 other people, you’re not responsible. You enabled. You didn’t determine. **
( Notice that belorg doesn’t use the words “enable” and “determine” because that would make it plain that he’s trying to equate two unequal things. Instead, he talks around the words, arguing enable = determine without saying so explicitly. This is another standard atheist rhetorical trick. )
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
Is “work[ing] indirectly through secondary causes” synonymous with influencing?
E
empther
Guest
NO!. It’s enabling, but not determining or even influencing.
See my last post. #16
A
A_G
Guest
God created the whole universe and everything in it. In terms of the earth (weather, oceans, land, etc…) and in outer space (such as planets, stars, asteroid, etc…) I believe God can control them if He wants to, and He can also let them go about space and time freely if He wants to as well… He can allow natural occurrences to take place, or He can directly intervene. God can do whatever He wants to.
Concerning humans, God gave us free-will. We can choose to accept and worship Him, or we can choose the wrong path an reject Him.
B
belorg
Guest
Why do you bother quoting me if you think my ‘bombastic nonsense’ is not worth reading, empther? Why do you even bother ‘countering’ this bombastic nonsense?belorg wrote the following bombastic nonsense, typical of atheists.
Don’t even bother reading it. Just go down to my counterpoint:
Nor did you knowingly create your son and his car from nothing (not directly, but through some intremedeiate causes), so why you think this analogy has any sort of relevance to what I said is beyond me.
God, creating me and you from nothing means that God either determined everything we will ever do, or that some actions have no explanantion at all.
If the first is true, then there is not even a hint of libertarian free will. if the second is true, our thoughts and actions are partly the result of how we were created and partly the result of purely random processes.
In neither case are we in any way responsible for anything, good or bad.
**( Notice that belorg doesn’t use the words “enable” and “determine” because that would make it plain that he’s trying to equate two unequal things. **
How would anybody ‘notice’ that without reading my ‘bombastic nonsense’, empther?
Do they just have to take your word on it?.
FYI, apparently you hacen’t read my bombastic nonsense either because, while I admit I did not use the word ‘enable’ (and for good reasons, because Aristotle’s deist God may merely enable things, the Christian God most certainly is believed to do a whole lot more) but I most certainly did use the word ‘determine.’
- Status