Is it a mortal sin

[Spock]

I think we can safely presume that even the tiny percentage of people who commit suicide would still prefer to continue to exist if they could figure out how to do so happily-they’re not trying to end their existence so much as end pain in one form or another that they haven’t been able to cope with.

Sure. But they are unable to do it. Those damned ones in hell are also unable change their predicament.

The Sermon on the Mount is the basic handbook. And in this discourse he’s telling us that making the grade equates to achieving true peace and happiness. Most of us balk at the meekness and humility part, though. I struggle with it myself at times.

Please take me more seriously. I am talking about an all-inclusive, definitive set of “do’s” and “don’t’s” which spell out in detail what is expected from us, and what is forbidden for us. Before you say that the Church does that, stop for a second. The Church does not make definitive, ironclad, “infallible” teachings about zillions of tough and controversial subjects. (For example, there is an intersting thread on “Moral Theology” now, where the OP asked what is the Church’s official standing of anal sex between husband and wife as a form of foreplay. It turns out that there is none.) There are many “problematic” issues, and I am not aware of any “official” stance issued by the Church.

True enough-I can’t argue with that. It seems that both our own moral worlds as well as the physical world are radically free to do as they will. Both may swing between reasonable order and chaos, the only restraints, as far as we know, being whatever is within their capabilities to do.

Yes, every word of yours is pure gold. And that is what I am “complaining” about.

We are talking about having to choose-rather than be complacent or “above” having to choose-between good and evil, life and death, love and selfishness, God and no God.

That sounds so nice and simple. But reality is much more complicated. There are zillions of specific “rules” issued by the Church. Not even all Catholics agree with all. There are millions of faithful Catholics who practice artifical birth control, who do not oppose abortion, or gay marriage, or other tough issues. Do they choose “evil”? There are homosexual Catholics who do not abstain from expressing their love toward each other. We “desperately” need God to come down, and tell us in no uncertain terms how we are supposed to behave. A reference to the “Sermon on the mount” is totally insufficient.

 

[Spock]

I know you believe that and I cannot say otherwise, but at the same time your desire that God meet you on your terms demonstrates something less than pure openness…I don’t say this as a put-down - We all put up barriers of some sort.

Why is that a problem? Besides, I do not “insist” that God should actually manifest himself in a physical manner - though it is the most persuasive method for me - according to my best (but still limited!) understanding. I accept that God may know an even better method than that, and if he would happen to choose that, I would not object. But it should be persuasive to me.

It has been my experience that we sometimes get answers we don’t want and/or don’t recognize. As I say I’ve some considerable experience with this. I can also say that, by maintaining faith and by seeking to be still in prayer and contemplation, God can and does speak quite clearly and distinctly. I’ve had it happen to me personally.

Good for you. I cannot resist and post a link from the Onion here. I hope you know that it is a tongue-in-cheek, highly satirical weekly paper. Funny as hell, and there is a lot of truth in it. here…

Here again you confuse the intent and action. In the physical world action takes so much greater precedent and our laws are built around controlling action. In the world of spirituality, intent is the greater…If we choose evil, will eventually tear us down and destroy us. If we choose Love, it will build us up to eternal life.

I do not “confuse” them, I make a distinction between them. Strange that I have to explain this - it is so very obvious to me. If that criminal’s intent would “destroy” him, it is his own business. If his intent is allowed to happen, but his intent cannot be taken into practice, the the “intended” victim does not suffer. According to your reasoning, the criminal will “destroy” himself, no matter what - by having that “intent”. But if he is prevented from doing the act, then at least the possible victim wil escape the inteded fate. And that is a very positive outcome.

So you think there are no rapes committed in jail?

Unfortunately there are. Due to our insufficient system, which God could perfect that there would be no rapes in jail.

If a child is old enough and determined enough they too will get around the safeguards…

Not if God puts those safeguards there.

As I already explained above, you are confusing what is truly important in the spirit life. Look at and read through Matthew ch 5, 6, 7. Look at how much emphasis Jesus places on intent - on right thinking - on not just “acting right” but “being right”.
The world looks for actions. God looks for intent…

Here you point out that basic difference between us. Let me tell you an old exchange between me and another poster. I asked him: “why does God respect the free will of a rapist over the free will of the woman who is raped?”. He answered: “the free will of the woman is not violated. She can freely will not to be raped, and just because she is unable to put that will into practice, it does not mean that her free will is impaired in any way”. Needless to say, I was speechless. I have never heard such a strange line of reasoning. (I prefer to say: “such a perverted, sick, nauseating and disgusting line of ‘non-reasoning’…”) Unfortunately I heard it many times since then.

Let’s put this into a different setting. A mafioso comes to someone, puts a gun to the head of this person (or to the head of this person’s child), and says: “do what I order you to do, or else…”. Is the person’s “free will” violated? According to you, it is not. After all the person’s intent (not to have his child be shot) is still there. The fact that he cannot carry out his wish, is of no consequence. How can you maintain such a view? It boggles my mind.

 

[dostoyevskyfan]

I was a believer once. I prayed, as honestly as only a child can do. Nothing ever happened. I have been told many times, that “if I pray long enough, honestly enough, hard enough” then “eventually” God will answer. When I asked “how long is long enough?” there was no reply (naturally). Sorry, my friend, such open-ended promises cannot be taken seriously.

Oops. How long?

I am interested in conducting an experiment. But it requires your participation. It would also require integrity on your part as we would have to take you on your word and there would be no way for us to empirically verify the results.

Some information that is relevant to the study would be:

1. When you were a believer, what specific faith did you practice?
2. How long did you spend in prayer asking for a personal revelation of God?
3. What prayers did you recite?

My hypothesis (correct me if I am wrong):
When you were a believer you were a non Catholic and were not reciting the most effective form of prayer. Hence, no response.

**My proposed procedure for the experiment using the scientific method:
**

Spend 1 hour in a Catholic Cathedral, reciting the rosary (the most effective form of prayer). Before you begin, state your intentions (a personal revelation of God’s existence) and humbly ask for it “in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit”.

I say in a Cathedral because you get special graces for saying the rosary in a Cathedral (something we believers call a partial indulgence).

After you conduct your experiment, post the results here. I am really curious if God will respond also.

Are you willing to give it a whirl?

 

[Mark1124]

Maybe we cannot agree on what “open-mindedness” is. In my neck of the woods it means that no matter how strongly one holds a belief, if a sufficient argument is presented against that belief, one should abandon it. It does not mean lowering the standards. It does not mean accepting something that is an insufficient evidence.

What would be sufficient evidence?
Miracles? miraclesofthesaints.com/ miraclesofthechurch.com/
Fulfilled prophecies? clarifyingchristianity.com/m_prophecies.shtml
The resurrection? leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/resurrec.html
How about the fact that the Church still exists, after 2000 years, despite modern skepticism, and has plenty of intelligent, highly educated people (such as Pope Benedict XVI) among its members?
If you’re still skeptical, try looking more closely at these events and try to disprove them, but you can’t just ignore the evidence like many skeptics do.

But I am most willing. I hope you believe me when I say that my door is open. God is welcome to come any time.

I was a believer once. I prayed, as honestly as only a child can do. Nothing ever happened. I have been told many times, that “if I pray long enough, honestly enough, hard enough” then “eventually” God will answer. When I asked “how long is long enough?” there was no reply (naturally). Sorry, my friend, such open-ended promises cannot be taken seriously.

Did you ever consider that you might be asking wrongly? “You do not possess because you do not ask. You ask but do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions.” (James 4:2-3)
If you don’t like open ended promises, try reading Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To by Anthony DeStefano. Here’s an excerpt from Chapter 1:
"Most people who have questions about God’s existence have never even tried to make contact with him. They’ve never made a sincere effort to suspend their doubts for one second and say: ‘God, I don’t know if you’re up there. In fact, I’m having a big problem believing in you. But if you do exist, will you please do something to show me, so that I know for sure?’
"Do you know what will happen if you say this kind of prayer? God is going to answer you. He is going to say YES. He is going to show you that he exists…
“As the Bible clearly states, we are never permitted to ‘test’ God Almighty. He simply will not stand for that. He will ignore us. If, for instance, you pray to God, ‘Please show me that you exist,’ and at the same time think to yourself, ‘And if you don’t show me, I will know that you’re not there,’ then I wouldn’t put too much stock in God’s answering you.”

I know where you’re coming from, I’ve been there myself. Eventually I asked God to show me that he exists, and he did. Whenever I began to doubt again, I just asked him to reveal himself again and forgive me for doubting. I prayed that same prayer at least four times, and got an answer every time. Several of my friends have prayed it, and they were all answered.

Hold it right there. I sense another huge misunderstanding. “Free will” as the ability to “wish, want, will, desire” something is totally irreleveant. I am no looking for brain-washing. The ability of carry out that “wish, want, will, desire” is what I am talking about. The criminal stays “free” to will another rape or torture. But society pluts him into jail, and prevents him from carrying out his “will”. He can “freely will” whatever comes into his mind, as long as his ability is curtailed.

Again, not relevant. First, if just one “freely chosen” action or rape is prevented by putting that criminal into jail, it was a wise decision. If just one child survives because the parent overruled the child’s desire to put that wire into a live socket, it was great decision. You cannot defend the status quo by saying that no matter how hard we try, there will be a few who can sneak by the protection. God is not impotent. We are. God can make perfect safeguards, we cannot.

Telling to that child not to insert that wire into a live socket is not the same then physically preventing it by covering that outlet. Telling that criminal not to commit a rape is not the same as throwing that criminal into jail. One ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.

Does a good parent keep their child at home where they cannot get hit by a car, fall off a bridge, etc., or do they recognize that, despite the risk of death, it is better for the child to give the child more freedom?

Maybe you will reconsider. I am unable to become a “mystic”. But you are free to use your critical skills. All I do is refer to reason and logic. Supposedly faith and reason are not contradictory. So drop your mysicism, and contemplate rationally what I just said. The “free will” is not the same as the “ability to carry out that will”. Unfortunately these two terms are frequently used interchangeably. If and when God “foresees” something that he definitely does not want to happen, he can prevent the action be carried out, without “tampering” with the person’s “free will”. And all of a sudden human evil will disappear.

Yes, but that would also take away a lot of good. How can a person learn from his mistakes if he is not allowed to make them?

 

[Spock]

I am interested in conducting an experiment. But it requires your participation. It would also require integrity on your part as we would have to take you on your word and there would be no way for us to empirically verify the results.

Some information that is relevant to the study would be:

1. When you were a believer, what specific faith did you practice?
2. How long did you spend in prayer asking for a personal revelation of God?
3. What prayers did you recite?

1. I was baptized a Presbytarian.
2. I was a child back then, a very long time ago. I did not specifically ask for a personal revelation, however I did ask for some “powers” to help out those who were sick and who needed help. (I was very naive, of course… just like children. But we are supposed to be like children, trusting.) And I asked for it every evening, for quite a long time. Sorry, cannot recall exactly how many days. But it was a lot. Incidentally the lack of response to those prayers was the first reason of my doubts. True, I forgot about those doubts, and I was a practising believer (going to church every Sunday, participating in Bible “study” classes etc.) until my college years.
3. No special prayers. They all came from the “heart”. I heard that those are the most effective - since they are the “Secret Supplications of the Heart”. (Accoring to Mark Twain’s: Letter of the recording Angel)

My hypothesis (correct me if I am wrong):
When you were a believer you were a non Catholic and were not reciting the most effective form of prayer. Hence, no response.

You are right. I was not a Catholic. I am not sure what the “most effective form” of prayer might be. To say that God does not answer the honest prayer of a child who is not Catholic and who does not use the “most effective kind” of prayer is pretty sad. Is God that discriminating? Do you have any “official, infallible evidence” from the Church that God only answers (positively) the prayers of Catholics, and those only if they are of the “most effective kind”?

My proposed procedure for the experiment using the scientific method:

Would you explain how is this proposed experiment is scientific? I am definitely interested.

Spend 1 hour in a Catholic Cathedral, reciting the rosary (the most effective form of prayer). Before you begin, state your intentions (a personal revelation of God’s existence) and humbly ask for it “in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit”.

I need help here. How does one recite the rosary? I need that help to be able to participate properly, and I will report the result here.

I say in a Cathedral because you get special graces for saying the rosary in a Cathedral (something we believers call a partial indulgence).

After you conduct your experiment, post the results here. I am really curious if God will respond also.

Are you willing to give it a whirl?

Certainly. I have nothing to lose. (One hour of my life is worth it. Just curious, what is so special about the one hour? Would 59 minutes be insufficient?) and maybe a lot to gain. Just need help about the rosary.

 

[Mark1124]

I need help here. How does one recite the rosary? I need that help to be able to participate properly, and I will report the result here.

rosary-center.org/howto.htm

Certainly. I have nothing to lose. (One hour of my life is worth it. Just curious, what is so special about the one hour? Would 59 minutes be insufficient?) and maybe a lot to gain. Just need help about the rosary.

The one hour comes from the story of the agony in the garden:
“When he returned to his disciples he found them asleep. He said to Peter, ‘So you could not keep watch with me for one hour? Watch and pray that you may not undergo the test. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.’” (Matthew 26:40-41)

 

[dostoyevskyfan]

1. No special prayers. They all came from the “heart”. I heard that those are the most effective - since they are the “Secret Supplications of the Heart”. (Accoring to Mark Twain’s: Letter of the recording Angel)

Yes prayers from the heart are generally more effective than prayers that have origins in other parts of the human anatomy. Mark Twain was an atheist and I’m not sure if was the best authority on “effective prayer” even though some atheists in America demonstrate better understanding of the Bible than believers. I believe he was raised in a protestant home…I think.

To say that God does not answer the honest prayer of a child who is not Catholic and who does not use the “most effective kind” of prayer is pretty sad.

Sad could be one word. “Unfair” would be most people’s objective unbiased conclusion. But if you operate under the assumption that “God exists” then Justice (with a captial J) doesn’t really come to fruition until beyond the grave.

If you operate under the idea that “God does not exist” you could say the same about unfit, slow, human beings who were eaten by lions in African. It is “sad” that some of our genetic parents didn’t have the necessary genes to enable survival and were therefore torn to pieces by wild beasts or died of some strange virus. Very unfair.

My point…God or no God…nothing’s fair.

Is God that discriminating? Do you have any “official, infallible evidence” from the Church that God only answers (positively) the prayers of Catholics, and those only if they are of the “most effective kind”?

I am a really arrogant person. The teaching of Christ that I struggle the most with would be his doctrine of humility, but I’m not as arrogant as to assume I have all the answers to your questions or that I have privileged access to the infinity complex mind of God, or understand all of the intricacies of his paradoxical plan…dying he destroyed our death, rising he restored our life…the kierkegaardian man/god paradox.

I will say that the rosary has a solid track record of “results” and has been reported as “effective” by many Catholics. If Catholics were to take a vote, I think we would nominate the rosary as most effective.

I can offer you two examples: one is obviously fatima 1917. But everyone knows about that and has their own interpretation of those events.

Not everyone knows about the role of the rosary in Hiroshima 1945.
What were the names of the nukes we dropped on Japan? I think it may have been “Fatboy” that we dropped on Hiroshima. There were several Jesuits who were saying the rosary about 1km from where Fatboy landed. Needless to say, they should have been incinerated. Their survival is beyond scientific explanation.

Would you explain how is this proposed experiment is scientific? I am definitely interested.

I retract that statement. It is only scientific as far as the experiment follows a set procedure and can be replicated. The results will obviously vary (some people might decide to lie about the results, or say the rosary in vain) and there is no control variable.
Our experiment would; however, follow the scientific method.

1. Ask a question. “Does God exist?”
2. Make a hypothesis. “Perhaps He does and is the Catholic God, the God of the Gregorian Calendar, the most written about man or God in human history, Jesus Christ.”
3. Test hypothesis. “If the Catholic God exists, and I ask for a personal revelation of his existence by asking in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, then he cannot refuse me because the Bible says he will ‘not reject anyone who comes to him’. I will test this while saying the rosary, which has been reported as the most effective form of prayer by Catholics. I will not say the prayer in vain or in an attempt to “mock God” but honestly and openly. I will do so in a holy place, a Catholic Cathedral.”
4. Analyze results. “Nothing happened in the next week or two and I resumed atheism. Or there was an inexplicable personal revelation and you were personally convinced that God exists.”

Obviously results will vary. Blaise Pascal had a personal revelation involving fire and “God of abraham and issac, not of the philosophers or scholars.” If you analyze all of the “personal revelations” reported by Catholics throughout 2k years not many will be the same. Teresa of Avila’s experience was much different from Joan of Arc’s…for example.

I need help here. How does one recite the rosary? I need that help to be able to participate properly, and I will report the result here.

The link already posted is great. Google is also great.Just print out the prayers and bring them to the cathedral. I’d recommend going at a time when no one is there. Most Cathedrals have a “marian chapel” or a section of the cathedral that is devoted to the virgin mary. That is the best place to say the rosary. Make sure you are kneeling, make the sign of the cross at the very beginning, and invoke the holy spirit (say "in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit at the start).

Also make sure you recite the “oh my jesus prayer” after every decade as was recommended by the VM at fatima.

 

[dostoyevskyfan]

Certainly. I have nothing to lose. (One hour of my life is worth it. Just curious, what is so special about the one hour? Would 59 minutes be insufficient?) and maybe a lot to gain. Just need help about the rosary.

Excellent. You have almost two thousand posts here which indicates multiple hours of your life spent on these forums. What is one more hour anyway?? It takes about 20 minutes to recite the rosary if you know the prayers. Say it 3 times to show God you are sincere. 3 is a special number for God. If you finish in 59 minutes then just leave. Just make sure you don’t say the prayers in vain, spitefully, or arrogantly…it will invalidate the procedure. You read the bible I’m sure you know why.

 

[JRKH]

Let’s put this into a different setting. A mafioso comes to someone, puts a gun to the head of this person (or to the head of this person’s child), and says: “do what I order you to do, or else…”. Is the person’s “free will” violated? According to you, it is not. After all the person’s intent (not to have his child be shot) is still there. The fact that he cannot carry out his wish, is of no consequence. How can you maintain such a view? It boggles my mind.

The free will is not violated…However, stresses are applied and the ability of the person to think clearly certainly would be affected and naturally the desire would be to protect your child and your own life as well. This shows all the more reason that we should really seek to internalize our faith so that our natural, reactive thinking is correct, and not just our actions (rule following).

There is a great deal missing from the scenario that can effect how a person should respond…For instance, what is the mafioso telling the person to do? How many others will be harmed by following his orders? Are you and your child in a state of grace? If so death (into everlasting life with God) is preferable to sinning - after which you’ll probably be killed anyway and not in a state of grace…
This is what I mean about ones world view. If one truly has faith then one is not concerned with physical death for it only opens to eternal life with God in heaven for the believer.

Now - just to be clear, I recognize that most people, even people of faith, would not react this way under the conditions presented. I’m highly doubtful that I would. I am speaking of how one should hope to react. Also I am seeking to demonstrate that the ability to choose, while made extremely difficult, is not removed…

Peace
James

 

[Spock]

Does a good parent keep their child at home where they cannot get hit by a car, fall off a bridge, etc., or do they recognize that, despite the risk of death, it is better for the child to give the child more freedom?

When there is a contagious disease or a plague “out there”, does the parent allow the child to play outside? When there is only the “normal, everyday” danger out there, the parent either accompanies the child, or makes sure (as much as possible) that the child will not fall into the traps. Since we lack the power of God, all we can do is minimize the chances of accidents. God could do the same protection perfectly. A parent who neglects to to everything he can to protect the child from fatal mistakes is not a “loving” parent - and that includes to seriously curtail the freedom of action on the child’s part. What is so hard about this concept to understand?

Yes, but that would also take away a lot of good. How can a person learn from his mistakes if he is not allowed to make them?

Seems to me that you did not read all what I said: “non-fatal” mistakes, the ones one can learn from must be obviously allowed. How could one learn from a fatal mistake? What good can come out of a “fatal mistake”? Of course, God could imbue us with the necessary knowledge “up front”, so we would not need to learn from our mistakes.

rosary-center.org/howto.htm

The one hour comes from the story of the agony in the garden:
“When he returned to his disciples he found them asleep. He said to Peter, ‘So you could not keep watch with me for one hour? Watch and pray that you may not undergo the test. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.’” (Matthew 26:40-41)

Thank you. Useful info.

 

[Spock]

Yes prayers from the heart are generally more effective than prayers that have origins in other parts of the human anatomy. Mark Twain was an atheist and I’m not sure if was the best authority on “effective prayer” even though some atheists in America demonstrate better understanding of the Bible than believers. I believe he was raised in a protestant home…I think.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I quoted Mark Twain in a light-hearted and tongue-in-cheek fashion, not seriously.

Sad could be one word. “Unfair” would be most people’s objective unbiased conclusion. But if you operate under the assumption that “God exists” then Justice (with a captial J) doesn’t really come to fruition until beyond the grave.

Yes, I heard it. And this argument is one of the strongest ones against God. Why should the reward and punishment come when it is “too late” to learn from them? Totally illogical. Immediate rewards and punishments (carrot and stick) are useful and effective ways to teach proper behavior - at least until the person to be taught becomes a rational agent. One would think that God is aware of this simple fact of psychology and act accordingly.

My point…God or no God…nothing’s fair.

Indeed. But if it is equally “unfair” under God, then what is the point? Shouldn’t one expect a “fairer” state of affairs under the rule of God?

I retract that statement. It is only scientific as far as the experiment follows a set procedure and can be replicated. The results will obviously vary (some people might decide to lie about the results, or say the rosary in vain) and there is no control variable.
Our experiment would; however, follow the scientific method.

1. Ask a question. “Does God exist?”
2. Make a hypothesis. “Perhaps He does and is the Catholic God, the God of the Gregorian Calendar, the most written about man or God in human history, Jesus Christ.”
3. Test hypothesis. “If the Catholic God exists, and I ask for a personal revelation of his existence by asking in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, then he cannot refuse me because the Bible says he will ‘not reject anyone who comes to him’. I will test this while saying the rosary, which has been reported as the most effective form of prayer by Catholics. I will not say the prayer in vain or in an attempt to “mock God” but honestly and openly. I will do so in a holy place, a Catholic Cathedral.”
4. Analyze results. “Nothing happened in the next week or two and I resumed atheism. Or there was an inexplicable personal revelation and you were personally convinced that God exists.”

Sounds like a reasonable setup. I will come back and report the result. To be on the safe side, I think that the experiment should be repeated more than once. The day after tomorrow we shall go on a trip. So I cannot report the result until we get home (about ten days).

 

[Spock]

The free will is not violated…However, stresses are applied and the ability of the person to think clearly certainly would be affected and naturally the desire would be to protect your child and your own life as well. This shows all the more reason that we should really seek to internalize our faith so that our natural, reactive thinking is correct, and not just our actions (rule following).

There is a great deal missing from the scenario that can effect how a person should respond…For instance, what is the mafioso telling the person to do? How many others will be harmed by following his orders? Are you and your child in a state of grace? If so death (into everlasting life with God) is preferable to sinning - after which you’ll probably be killed anyway and not in a state of grace…
This is what I mean about ones world view. If one truly has faith then one is not concerned with physical death for it only opens to eternal life with God in heaven for the believer.

Now - just to be clear, I recognize that most people, even people of faith, would not react this way under the conditions presented. I’m highly doubtful that I would. I am speaking of how one should hope to react. Also I am seeking to demonstrate that the ability to choose, while made extremely difficult, is not removed…

So you say that the “freedom to choose” is never taken away? Suppose you are in a locked room with a fire burning in it. You can “choose” to stay put and quietly burn to death, or you can scream and run around until you die. Is that an example of “free choice” you are talking about?

Or maybe you can break the window and jump from the 50th floor and “choose” to die due to the unforgiving gravity? Is that the choice you talk about?

A poor women, who is being gang-raped has the choice: to fight in vain, or she can choose to lay back and enjoy? Is that the “free will” which cannot be violated?

No wonder we cannot come to an agreement. We are so apart that we might as well be using different languages. When I speak about the “freedom to choose”, I speak about the ability to choose between at least 2 ways to reach the desired goal.
First - one has a goal to achieve. (To survive in the first examples, or not to be raped in the other one).
Second - there must be at least two ways to achieve it (PAP - the principle of alternate possibilities).
And third - the person must have the Locus of Decision.
If any of these is missing, we cannot speak of “freedom of choice” or “free will”.

It is true, in a very superficial manner that the “locus of decision” is always with the person involved - unless there was a succesful brainwashing, but that “decision” cannot be called “free” if the person acts under extreme duress, even if there are “two or more options to choose from”. Sure, she can “choose” to lay back and enjoy the rape, but no one of sound mind woul call that decision “free”. If a mafioso threatens your child and demands that you perform a crime, and you do it, no judge will hold you responsible for your action - since you acted under extreme duress.

 

[Spock]

While I was doing a chore (mowing the lawn) I had time to contemplate the suggestions. First, I can already tell you that if the experiment would bring a positive result, I would be absolutely delighted. Contrary to the frequent assertion that atheists refuse to believe because they do not “want” God to exist (or they wish to conduct their sinful ways), all the atheists I happened to talk to agreed that it would be fabulous, great, wonderful if God existed. After all, who would not want to exist forever in eternal bliss and happiness?

That being said, I will tell you why I do not expect a positive result. How many faithful Catholics have prayed the rosary, asking that a loved one would recover from a fatal disease or for some other, equally worthy goal? (I am not talking about frivolous prayers.) I have no data, but I would surmise, many milllions did. How many of these supplications have been answered in a positive fashion, and have been documented? I have no information on that either, but I would geuss, precious few. Not more than one can expect as random fluctuation.

Of course I would be very glad if I received a positive answer. I have no idea what form to expect. But if I find it convincing, I will happily accept it. Can’t do better than that.

 

[Mark1124]

When there is a contagious disease or a plague “out there”, does the parent allow the child to play outside? When there is only the “normal, everyday” danger out there, the parent either accompanies the child, or makes sure (as much as possible) that the child will not fall into the traps. Since we lack the power of God, all we can do is minimize the chances of accidents. God could do the same protection perfectly. A parent who neglects to to everything he can to protect the child from fatal mistakes is not a “loving” parent - and that includes to seriously curtail the freedom of action on the child’s part. What is so hard about this concept to understand?

Preventing accidents is one thing. A parent might be able to prevent his child from accidentally getting hit by a car, but be unable to prevent them from choosing to run into the road right in front of a car. God could prevent them from carrying out this choice, but he could not prevent the choice itself without violating free will.

Seems to me that you did not read all what I said: “non-fatal” mistakes, the ones one can learn from must be obviously allowed. How could one learn from a fatal mistake? What good can come out of a “fatal mistake”? Of course, God could imbue us with the necessary knowledge “up front”, so we would not need to learn from our mistakes.

I read it, I just misunderstood what you said. I assumed you were referring to mortal sin (which is fatal, but allows for resurrection), and apparently you were referring to hell. My mistake. In that case, it is good because it shows that God is just and respects our free will, and it gives them what they wanted. Do you think the people in hell want to be in heaven? Would it be fair for God to say “I don’t care how much you hate me, I’m going to force you to be with me forever”? And the angels had the necessary knowledge up front. One third of them rejected God anyway. Since we lack that knowledge, we are less culpable for our mistakes, so we don’t end up in hell eternally the first time we sin.

 

[Spock]

Preventing accidents is one thing.

Does God prevent those accidents?

A parent might be able to prevent his child from accidentally getting hit by a car, but be unable to prevent them from choosing to run into the road right in front of a car. God could prevent them from carrying out this choice, but he could not prevent the choice itself without violating free will.

That is the whole point!!! No loving being would hold “free will” in higher regard than protecting the loved one from making a fatal error! And of course no loving being would hold the “free will” of a rapist in higher regard then the “free will” of the victim who only wants to escape! Why does God allow the “free will” of the rapist go unimpeded, and allow it to trump the “free will” of the victim? Whose side is God on? The rapist or the victim?

I read it, I just misunderstood what you said. I assumed you were referring to mortal sin (which is fatal, but allows for resurrection), and apparently you were referring to hell. My mistake. In that case, it is good because it shows that God is just and respects our free will, and it gives them what they wanted.

No one “wants” to be tortured forver. That is a ridiculous nonsense.

Do you think the people in hell want to be in heaven?

Of course they would. Everyone would, if given the chance to make an informed decision. Show them heaven as is, show them hell as is - maybe even let them try both of them if they want to, and let them make the decision when they have all the pertinent information. Of course the decison should not be a binary one. If someone wishes to be in heaven, let them go there. If someone wishes (explicitly wants!) to be tortured in hell, let them go there. (And allow them to change their mind, if they want to.) But a loving being allows a third option (just in case someone wants that) obliteration, the cessation of existence - if that is something someone really wants. That choice cannot be changed, of course. A nonexistent person cannot “change his mind”.

Would it be fair for God to say “I don’t care how much you hate me, I’m going to force you to be with me forever”?

Who says to God in God’s face: “I hate you?”. And if there would be one (which I doubt) is then the “fair” thing to say: “you do not want to share my eternal happiness, so I will torture you forever”???

And the angels had the necessary knowledge up front. One third of them rejected God anyway. Since we lack that knowledge, we are less culpable for our mistakes, so we don’t end up in hell eternally the first time we sin.

That is just a fairy tale. Let’s stay on the platform of rationality.

 

[JRKH]

Spock said:
No one “wants” to be tortured forever. That is a ridiculous nonsense.

I agree with this and yet I have seen and known people who, by their choices, constantly cause themselves problems and they are so wrapped up in themselves that they cannot or will not accept responsibility. You’ve probably known some yourself…
They speed constantly, but are angry with the (expletive) cop who gives them a ticket
At work they only do the minimum, trash talk the company etc. but are sure that the "boss has it in for them…
They drink, they smoke, they carouse, and complain they feel bad
They grouse that they never have money (but heaven forbid you ask them to work overtime)…
They complain about the government, about taxes etc. but then don’t vote…
In short, they live a completely self centered, self absorbed, existence of self persecution…

Do they want to be “tortured” (continue in this lowly state) forever? Of course not…And yet they choose to remain so. Some people are just like that.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

While I was doing a chore (mowing the lawn) I had time to contemplate the suggestions. First, I can already tell you that if the experiment would bring a positive result, I would be absolutely delighted. Contrary to the frequent assertion that atheists refuse to believe because they do not “want” God to exist (or they wish to conduct their sinful ways), all the atheists I happened to talk to agreed that it would be fabulous, great, wonderful if God existed. After all, who would not want to exist forever in eternal bliss and happiness?

Just had to mention - I too have had some of my best insights while mowing the Lawn…In fact God spoke very clearly and directly to me once while I was riding my Lawn tractor…

That being said, I will tell you why I do not expect a positive result. How many faithful Catholics have prayed the rosary, asking that a loved one would recover from a fatal disease or for some other, equally worthy goal? (I am not talking about frivolous prayers.) I have no data, but I would surmise, many millions did. How many of these supplications have been answered in a positive fashion, and have been documented? I have no information on that either, but I would guess, precious few. Not more than one can expect as random fluctuation.

Actually you are talking to one now who has made such prayers for healing, and who is living with God’s answer to those prayers. His answer was No to healing, and yet he has given me tremendous strength and endurance (in spit of my own weaknesses) in caring for my loved one who suffers from Alzheimer’s disease.

The important thing to remember about prayer is that even with our requests for specific things, it is important that we pray first and foremost for God’s Will to be done in our lives. This opens us up to the possibility of far greater growth than if God just plopped our wishes into our laps.

Of course I would be very glad if I received a positive answer. I have no idea what form to expect. But if I find it convincing, I will happily accept it. Can’t do better than that.

It is a wise thing to recognize that the form may come in an unexpected way. It might be subtle or it might be more “clear”. Many great discoveries have come through unexpected and “unlooked for” outcomes…

Peace
James

 

[Spock]

I agree with this and yet I have seen and known people who, by their choices, constantly cause themselves problems and they are so wrapped up in themselves that they cannot or will not accept responsibility. You’ve probably known some yourself…

I certainly did.

They speed constantly, but are angry with the (expletive) cop who gives them a ticket
At work they only do the minimum, trash talk the company etc. but are sure that the "boss has it in for them…
They drink, they smoke, they carouse, and complain they feel bad
They grouse that they never have money (but heaven forbid you ask them to work overtime)…
They complain about the government, about taxes etc. but then don’t vote…
In short, they live a completely self centered, self absorbed, existence of self persecution…

Seen all of them. But of course in a sense they like it. People love to complain - well, at least a certain percentage of them. Most people do not resort to it.

Do they want to be “tortured” (continue in this lowly state) forever? Of course not…And yet they choose to remain so. Some people are just like that.

Again we run into a problem of possible miscommunication. The kind of life you describe is not “torture” - the way how I understand “what is supposed to happen in hell”. Today it is “politically correct” to “downplay” hell. It is said to be a “separation from God” - nothing else. In the days of yore, the teaching was much more explicit. The people during the times of the Old Testament probably thought that burning in a fire (which is not quenched -sounds familiar?) is the worst torture they could conceive - so that was how they imagined hell. No matter what kind of torture happens there, no one would “want” it to happen. They all would “want out”.

 

[JRKH]

I certainly did.

Seen all of them. But of course in a sense they like it. People love to complain - well, at least a certain percentage of them. Most people do not resort to it.

I knew you had…We’ve all met these types… and all we can do is shake our heads and think…“why don’t they figure it out?” - but they never seem to…

Again we run into a problem of possible miscommunication. The kind of life you describe is not “torture” - the way how I understand “what is supposed to happen in hell”. Today it is “politically correct” to “downplay” hell. It is said to be a “separation from God” - nothing else. In the days of yore, the teaching was much more explicit. The people during the times of the Old Testament probably thought that burning in a fire (which is not quenched -sounds familiar?) is the worst torture they could conceive - so that was how they imagined hell. No matter what kind of torture happens there, no one would “want” it to happen. They all would “want out”.

I agree that the descriptions of hell can vary. That is due to our limitations and what might be seen in a specific place and time to be most effective as a description.
Personally I don’t place the limits on God that some do…I don’t hold strictly to the descriptions that might have been used two or three thousand years ago to people of very different intellectual makeup. I don’t even deny that “annihilation”, or eventual “universal dispensation” might be part of God’s overall plan.
I just know that these things have not been revealed to the point that they are taught by The Church…So I work with what I have…God tells us what to do in order to avoid the bad stuff (whatever it is in reality) and if I believe, and I do these these things, He will be true and Just and bring me home to Him.

I also agree that no one would “want” torture to happen, but it’s not so much that they choose the torture, as it is that they refuse to yield to God’s Grace - they are just too full of Pride. I know it’s hard to believe, but it’s true.

Peace
James

 

[Spock]

Just had to mention - I too have had some of my best insights while mowing the Lawn…In fact God spoke very clearly and directly to me once while I was riding my Lawn tractor…

I bet so. A great time for serenity. Even though I only have an old push-mower, not even self-propelling. But the area is not large.

Actually you are talking to one now who has made such prayers for healing, and who is living with God’s answer to those prayers. His answer was No to healing, and yet he has given me tremendous strength and endurance (in spit of my own weaknesses) in caring for my loved one who suffers from Alzheimer’s disease.

I can understand that. But, you see, there are children, who only see that their mother is now gone. They do not understand. They pray, and their prayer goes unanswered. Let’s not fool ourselves that the “answer was NO”. There is no answer. Period. (By the way, this is another euphemism “the answer was: no” which goes under my skin - because it is so obviously a cop-out. Let’s call a “spade” a “spade” and let’s not use politically correct euphemisms.)

The important thing to remember about prayer is that even with our requests for specific things, it is important that we pray first and foremost for God’s Will to be done in our lives. This opens us up to the possibility of far greater growth than if God just plopped our wishes into our laps.

I really do not wish to hurt your feelings. But this is just a cop-out in my eyes. You ask for something, and nothing happens - that is the unvarnished truth.

Jesus promised: “whatever you ask in my name will be fulfilled”. Not a hard to understand promise, which needs to be interpreted. No exceptions mentioned. As Dostoyevskyfan mentioned: “…he cannot refuse me because the Bible says he will 'not reject anyone who comes to him”. Yet it seems to me that the requests which are actually filfilled are as rare as white ravens. And the requests which are not fulfilled are all over the place.