Is our relationship with God repaired by His Son?

[Vico]

I was told that God keeps the person alive after death of body. What does alive mean if he cannot do any act?

Some people believe that. Christian teaching is that the soul survives and is united again at the general resurrection with a body. The person is the soul with body, so properly the person is constituted only with both soul and body. If someone is in a state of friendship with God at death, then that determines the later heavenly state, conversely, determines a hellish state. The state of purgatory frees the soul from attachments to creatures in preparation for the heavenly state, prior to the general resurrection, but being in the purgatorial state does not exclude a soul from heaven.

 

[STT]

Perhaps, but a solid rebuttal of your counter. Your attempt at dismissal is noticed.

I don’t see any rebuttal, where? which post?.

Lol, the Immaculate Conception is not a new doctrine in Christendom. The problem was solved centuries before you brought it up. It only continues to exist through ignorance.

Immaculate Conception can be granted to everyone. It is all in God’s disposal. He can do it very easy. So why we all are not granted with such a gift?

Classical conditioning. See “Pavlov’s Dog” for more on this simple concept.

It is not classical conditioning. You are a rational being therefore you won’t hurt yourself because it cause you more suffering.

 

[Vonsalza]

I don’t see any rebuttal, where? which post?.

What are you? A baby bird that requires oral-to-oral feeding? If you don’t want to keep up, then fine. Don’t expect me to give you recaps every time I dismiss some assumption-laden, existential nonsense of yours.

Immaculate Conception can be granted to everyone. It is all in God’s disposal. He can do it very easy. So why we all are not granted with such a gift?

Excellent application of the Immaculate Conception by someone who very, very obviously does not understand it.

It is not classical conditioning. You are a rational being therefore you won’t hurt yourself because it cause you more suffering.

…and I know that based on similar experience. Which is conditioning.

I’m starting to think the others are right. We can show you the sky, but there’s no way I can get you to admit it’s blue.

 

[STT]

What are you? A baby bird that requires oral-to-oral feeding? If you don’t want to keep up, then fine. Don’t expect me to give you recaps every time I dismiss some assumption-laden, existential nonsense of yours.

Excellent application of the Immaculate Conception by someone who very, very obviously does not understand it.

…and I know that based on similar experience. Which is conditioning.

I’m starting to think the others are right. We can show you the sky, but there’s no way I can get you to admit it’s blue.

Never mind.

 

[goout]

Suffering doesn’t heal a wound instead it make it worst.

Why are you so preoccupied with suffering? Maybe this preoccupation influences your view of the world.
If all of life were suffering you might have a point.
All of life is not suffering. Existence itself is not suffering. Through our existence we experience both “suffering and comfort”.

Why are you so preoccupied with suffering?

 

[STT]

Why are you so preoccupied with suffering? Maybe this preoccupation influences your view of the world.

If all of life were suffering you might have a point.

Suffering is pointless whether it is a little or a lot.

All of life is not suffering. Existence itself is not suffering. Through our existence we experience both “suffering and comfort”.

Existence is meaningless. On top of that we suffer also.

Why are you so preoccupied with suffering?

Why not? It doesn’t make any sense when you believe on omnibenevolent God.

 

[goout]

Suffering is pointless whether it is a little or a lot.

Existence is meaningless. On top of that we suffer also.

Why not? It doesn’t make any sense when you believe on omnibenevolent God.

Why not be preoccupied with suffering?
because you have the choice to occupy yourself with all of life. If you have alternatives but only look at half of life you become blind. Why would you want to be blind?

 

[STT]

Why not be preoccupied with suffering?

There is no point in suffering. Suffering just disturb mind. Why I should preoccupy myself with suffering.

because you have the choice to occupy yourself with all of life.

When you become completely occupied with life then you have no time to ask about the purpose and meaning of life.

If you have alternatives but only look at half of life you become blind.

I am looking at the whole life but I don’t see any purpose in it.

Why would you want to be blind?

I don’t want to be blind.

 

[goout]

There is no point in suffering. Suffering just disturb mind. Why I should preoccupy myself with suffering.

When you become completely occupied with life then you have no time to ask about the purpose and meaning of life.

I am looking at the whole life but I don’t see any purpose in it.

I don’t want to be blind.

Why are you preoccupied with suffering?

 

[STT]

Why are you preoccupied with suffering?

I am not preoccupied with suffering. I just find it useless.

 

[goout]

I am not preoccupied with suffering. I just find it useless.

Your words say differently.
You pretty consistently fixate on suffering to prove that God doesn’t exist.

If you were logically consistent you would look at the whole of existence including the comfortable parts of it, and you would hold God accountable for all of it.

You don’t do that.You say continually “Look how bad it is! God does not exist”.

I never hear you say “Look how good it is! God does not exist”.

Are you holding God accountable, or not?

Why would you base your philosophy of life on an incomplete view of human existence?

 

[STT]

Your words say differently.

I don’t think so.

You pretty consistently fixate on suffering to prove that God doesn’t exist.

My aim is not to prove that God does not exist. I am just raising an issue related to Omnibenevolent God. The question related to this thread is very clear: Why we are here if our relationship with God is repaired?

If you were logically consistent you would look at the whole of existence including the comfortable parts of it, and you would hold God accountable for all of it.

Comfortable or uncomfortable, it is meaningless.

You don’t do that.You say continually “Look how bad it is! God does not exist”.

I have never claimed that God does not exist in any of my threads. I don’t think that you can prove or disprove God.

I never hear you say “Look how good it is! God does not exist”.

You cannot conclude God existence that way. God is Omnibenevolent in your definition.

Are you holding God accountable, or not?

Yes, if there is any. But that just raises a question about why we are here if He is Omnibenevolent. Maybe He is neutral. That makes more sense.

Why would you base your philosophy of life on an incomplete view of human existence?

God is creator. Isn’t He? So there is the creation and God and God’s relation with the creation. That is all. The creation we know because we are part of it. God’s relation with creation defines God. Don’t you think?

 

[John_Martin]

My aim is not to prove that God does not exist. I am just raising an issue related to Omnibenevolent God. The question related to this thread is very clear: Why we are here if our relationship with God is repaired?

By the way, perhaps you are having an issue because you believe in an “omnibenevolent god”.
The God we serve in our hierarchy of servants, as the Church, is not your omnibenevolent god.
Our God is merciful to them that fear and love him, but wrathful to them that do not.

As far as “suffering”, any material being is always (100% of the time) touched and moved by other material being, thus “passive” to some degree or another in any movement it has - this is “suffering movement from another” (“passion” for “passive”).

Now some material things and movement are not evil, and in being moved by those we are not feeling “hurt”, but rather enjoy them. But we always “suffer” being moved by other material being.

We are here to do a job (as I said, we are a hierarchy of servants for our Master). You do not believe in our Master, therefore you do not serve him and you wish to leave the place he put us to serve him until he comes for us.
I am sorry you do not like it here, but for us it is delightful to serve our Lord, even in the midst of the hurts.

 

[Vico]

I am not preoccupied with suffering. I just find it useless.

A sacrifice may be an expression of love when it is done willingly.

 

[Dorothy]

A sacrifice may be an expression of love when it is done willingly.

And it aids in sanctifying us as we meditate on the Lord’s Passion for us.

 

[STT]

By the way, perhaps you are having an issue because you believe in an “omnibenevolent god”.
The God we serve in our hierarchy of servants, as the Church, is not your omnibenevolent god.
Our God is merciful to them that fear and love him, but wrathful to them that do not.

Fear and love at the same time. That is very weird to me. A Omnibenevolent God cannot be wrathful.

We are here to do a job (as I said, we are a hierarchy of servants for our Master). You do not believe in our Master, therefore you do not serve him and you wish to leave the place he put us to serve him until he comes for us.
I am sorry you do not like it here, but for us it is delightful to serve our Lord, even in the midst of the hurts.

What is the job?

 

[STT]

A sacrifice may be an expression of love when it is done willingly.

We are talking about suffering and not sacrifice.

 

[Vico]

We are talking about suffering and not sacrifice.

Sacrifice is destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else. When we suffer as a result of doing moral good it is a sacrifice. We so just as Jesus said we would, because they would treat his followers as they did him.

 

[John_Martin]

Fear and love at the same time. That is very weird to me. A Omnibenevolent God cannot be wrathful.

What is the job?

Again, “The God we serve in our hierarchy of servants, as the Church, is not your omnibenevolent god.” He is wrathful to those who do not fear and love him.
And, “I, your God ‘I AM’, am a jealous God, …”
Pharaoh did not fear or love him, and drowned in the Red Sea, because our God was Jealous to protect the People who did fear and love him.
Ananias and Saphira did not fear or love him and fell dead at Peter’s feet, while the rest of the people bringing offerings to the feet of the Apostles shared the wealth of this treasure in common for the blessing of all of them.
God is NOT omnibenevolent.

The job: to be his bodily presence in the world for you to come to and be baptized into friendship with this non-omnibenevolent God we have.

 

[goout]

Again, “The God we serve in our hierarchy of servants, as the Church, is not your omnibenevolent god.” He is wrathful to those who do not fear and love him.
And, “I, your God ‘I AM’, am a jealous God, …”
Pharaoh did not fear or love him, and drowned in the Red Sea, because our God was Jealous to protect the People who did fear and love him.
Ananias and Saphira did not fear or love him and fell dead at Peter’s feet, while the rest of the people bringing offerings to the feet of the Apostles shared the wealth of this treasure in common for the blessing of all of them.
God is NOT omnibenevolent.

The job: to be his bodily presence in the world for you to come to and be baptized into friendship with this non-omnibenevolent God we have.

For the sake of clarity, how are you defining omnibenevolence?
It is fairly standard theology that God is good, and is love.
God actively wills what is good for us, while not violating our free will or the consequences thereof.
(love is to will for the good of another…)