M
Michael1801
Guest
Last edited:
- Status
E
EndTimes
Guest
Last edited:
E
EndTimes
Guest
God brought Man into Existence.
M
Michael1801
Guest
I see you used the past tense.Michael1801:
God brought Man into Existence.
What is your point?
Do you deny that God actively wills man’s existence?
Are you perhaps saying that God just started the ball rolling, and then stood back to watch?
Don’t you believe that He’s both Creator and Sustainer?
Can you not see the difference between believing that, and believing that man just naturally evolved without God having anything to do with the process after He created the universe and set it in motion (like a great clockmaker who just sat back and watched after He made the clock, wound it up, and started it going)?
The clockmaker idea is what’s called Deism, and it’s not the same as Theism.
If you can see the difference between the two, why can’t you see the difference between saying that God passively permits something, and saying that He actively wills it?
Do you believe He just permitted the big bang?
Even a Deist, who thinks of God as a great clockmaker, believes that God did more than just permit the clock to put itself together.
Why would you say that God permits freewill instead of saying that He wills it to exist?
And when you say He brought man into existence, do you mean to deny that He sustains his existence?
And if He created and sustains him, doesn’t He will his existence?
Where is it exactly that you disagree with me?
And what are you trying to say?
What I’m saying is that God wills man to exist, and to have freewill.
He doesn’t just permit it, the way He permits evil and sin to exist.
He wills the existence of creation, man (as the pinnacle of creation), and human freewill (as the thing that makes man more than a robot) per se–He doesn’t just permit their existence (or will them to exist per accidens) the way He does the things that are coincident to the existence of creation, man, and human freewill (like war, famine, sin, and evil.)
That’s what I’m saying.
Please show me where you disagree.
And tell me what you’re trying to say.
Because I don’t understand you.
Last edited:
M
Michael1801
Guest
To those of you who say there’s no such thing as a “coincidence,” would something like this have to be a God-sent warning of impending death?
"“I was walking through a graveyard yesterday, and stepped on a broken piece of headstone with just my birthday inscribed on it.”
"“I was walking through a graveyard yesterday, and stepped on a broken piece of headstone with just my birthday inscribed on it.”
Loading…
didyouknowfacts-com.cdn.ampproject.org
M
Michael1801
Guest
According to a Jewish publication I found interesting, the numerical value (Gematria) of Donald Trump’s name (in Hebrew) is 424–and that matches “The Messiah, The Son of David.”
And whether you pick Hillary Clinton’s first name or last name, they both equal 255–and that matches “Amalekite woman” (and the Amalekites were enemies of Israel.)
But according to the same publication, the numerical value of Mr. Trump’s name also matches “me’umad ra” (“a bad candidate” in Hebrew.)
And Hillary Clinton’s full name equals 510 (255+255), and that matches “t’hi malkah” (“crown her Queen” in Hebrew.)
So if there are no coincidences (in any sense of the word) what are we to make of these things (and things like them)?
Did God want Jews to vote for Mr. Trump and not for Hillary?
And since we know that Jesus is the only “Messiah, The Son of David” (and it seems unlikely that Mr. Trump’s father and mother were students of Gematria, and knew he’d be running for president some day) would God go so far as to encode a false or misleading message into Mr. Trump’s name so that Jewish Americans would vote for him?
And sense we know (in hindsight) that Mr. Trump (as the winner of the election) wasn’t a bad candidate, what was that supposed to mean?
I suppose he could be a bad candidate in November, but there doesn’t seem much the Republicans can do about since he’ll be running as an incumbent.
And what about Hillary?
If these things aren’t coincidences, is God telling us to abandon our constitution and “crown her Queen”?
Or is He calling her an enemy of Israel?
I’m not suggesting that these concurrences occurred outside of God’s will, or that they took Him by surprise-- but are they all intended to have meaning?
Are none of them coincidences (in some sense of the word)?
How do those of you who say there are no coincidences explain such things?
And can you show me where I’ve misunderstood or misrepresented what Saint Aquinas has to say on the subject?
And whether you pick Hillary Clinton’s first name or last name, they both equal 255–and that matches “Amalekite woman” (and the Amalekites were enemies of Israel.)
But according to the same publication, the numerical value of Mr. Trump’s name also matches “me’umad ra” (“a bad candidate” in Hebrew.)
And Hillary Clinton’s full name equals 510 (255+255), and that matches “t’hi malkah” (“crown her Queen” in Hebrew.)
So if there are no coincidences (in any sense of the word) what are we to make of these things (and things like them)?
Did God want Jews to vote for Mr. Trump and not for Hillary?
And since we know that Jesus is the only “Messiah, The Son of David” (and it seems unlikely that Mr. Trump’s father and mother were students of Gematria, and knew he’d be running for president some day) would God go so far as to encode a false or misleading message into Mr. Trump’s name so that Jewish Americans would vote for him?
And sense we know (in hindsight) that Mr. Trump (as the winner of the election) wasn’t a bad candidate, what was that supposed to mean?
I suppose he could be a bad candidate in November, but there doesn’t seem much the Republicans can do about since he’ll be running as an incumbent.
And what about Hillary?
If these things aren’t coincidences, is God telling us to abandon our constitution and “crown her Queen”?
Or is He calling her an enemy of Israel?
I’m not suggesting that these concurrences occurred outside of God’s will, or that they took Him by surprise-- but are they all intended to have meaning?
Are none of them coincidences (in some sense of the word)?
How do those of you who say there are no coincidences explain such things?
And can you show me where I’ve misunderstood or misrepresented what Saint Aquinas has to say on the subject?
Last edited:
L
lelinator
Guest
@Freddy, how’s your IQ doing now?
F
Freddy
Guest
Much better now, thanks. I found a good cure for feeling stupid. Just head over to any thread about evolution and you’ll feel a lot smarter after talking to some of the posters.
M
Michael1801
Guest
Hi Freddy.
This is from Yale University Library.
"Gematria is a Jewish form of numerology in which the letters of the Hebrew alphabet are substituted with corresponding numbers. The first ten letters are given number values that increase consecutively from 1 to 10. The next eight letters are given number values that increase by a factor of ten from 20 to 90. The final four letters are given number values that increase by a factor of one hundred from 100 to 400. In Hebrew, gematria is often used as an alternative to Arabic Numerals when recording numbers. Hebrew dates are generally written using gematria.
In addition to its use as a number system, gematria can also be used as a form of bibliomancy in order to obtain a more spiritual understanding of Biblical texts. While many scoff at using this “cute word play” as a means of explaining the Bible, many Kabbalists – Jewish mystics who find great power in the spirituality of words – see it as a valid form of Biblical interpretation. An example of Biblical exegesis using gematria can be found in the fifth of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:12) where the Children of Israel are instructed to “honor thy father and mother”. How does one honor his parents? By examining the gematria of the Hebrew word for honor, כבד (kabed) we find that it has the value of 26 ([כ=20, ב=2, ד=4, [20+2+4=26). The gematria of the thematically similar word for love אהבה (ahavah), is 13 ([א=1, ה=5, ב=2, ה=5, [1+5+2+5=13). Because the gematria of כבד (kabed) is double that of אהבה (ahavah), it was concluded that one honors his parents by showing them a double portion of love."
About Gematria | Yale University Library.
Were you one of those who said that there was no such thing as coincidence?
And if you were, does that mean that you see it as no coincidence that the ancient peoples used letters for numbers, making it possible to correlate numbers with words, names, and sentences?
And if you don’t see that correlation as coincidence, do you see it as Providence?
And what do you think of the correlations between the number 510 and Hillary Clinton, and “crown her Queen”?
Providence or coincidence?
And is there any definition of coincidence that you’d be willing to accept as compatible with Divine Providence?
And do you think Aquinas has anything useful to say?
This is from Yale University Library.
"Gematria is a Jewish form of numerology in which the letters of the Hebrew alphabet are substituted with corresponding numbers. The first ten letters are given number values that increase consecutively from 1 to 10. The next eight letters are given number values that increase by a factor of ten from 20 to 90. The final four letters are given number values that increase by a factor of one hundred from 100 to 400. In Hebrew, gematria is often used as an alternative to Arabic Numerals when recording numbers. Hebrew dates are generally written using gematria.
In addition to its use as a number system, gematria can also be used as a form of bibliomancy in order to obtain a more spiritual understanding of Biblical texts. While many scoff at using this “cute word play” as a means of explaining the Bible, many Kabbalists – Jewish mystics who find great power in the spirituality of words – see it as a valid form of Biblical interpretation. An example of Biblical exegesis using gematria can be found in the fifth of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:12) where the Children of Israel are instructed to “honor thy father and mother”. How does one honor his parents? By examining the gematria of the Hebrew word for honor, כבד (kabed) we find that it has the value of 26 ([כ=20, ב=2, ד=4, [20+2+4=26). The gematria of the thematically similar word for love אהבה (ahavah), is 13 ([א=1, ה=5, ב=2, ה=5, [1+5+2+5=13). Because the gematria of כבד (kabed) is double that of אהבה (ahavah), it was concluded that one honors his parents by showing them a double portion of love."
About Gematria | Yale University Library.
Were you one of those who said that there was no such thing as coincidence?
And if you were, does that mean that you see it as no coincidence that the ancient peoples used letters for numbers, making it possible to correlate numbers with words, names, and sentences?
And if you don’t see that correlation as coincidence, do you see it as Providence?
And what do you think of the correlations between the number 510 and Hillary Clinton, and “crown her Queen”?
Providence or coincidence?
And is there any definition of coincidence that you’d be willing to accept as compatible with Divine Providence?
And do you think Aquinas has anything useful to say?
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
M
Michael1801
Guest
Thank you Freddy, but please clarify something for me.
I think you said “no” (you weren’t one who said that there’s no such thing as coincidence), “no” (you don’t see it as no coincidence that ancient peoples used letters for numbers, etc.), “no” (you don’t see this and the accompanying correlations as Providence), “nothing” is what you think of the correlation between “Hillary Clinton” and “crown her Queen,” “coincidence” (as opposed to Providence) is what you’d call it, “no” you wouldn’t accept any definition of “coincidence” as compatible with Providence, and “yes” you think Aquinas said something useful.
You were asked seven questions, and you gave seven answers, and that’s what I understand you to be saying.
But your answer to the sixth question seems to contradict everything else you said.
How can you say “no,” you see no definition of “coincidence” that fits in with Providence after you just called certain things coincidences?
Are you saying that you don’t believe in Providence now?
And what did Aquinas say that you found useful?
Do you think I understand him correctly?
Again, thank you for your reply, and please clarify what you’re trying to say.
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
I’m assuming that you are using it in a religious sense (why else capitalise it…). So no, as an atheist, the concept makes no sense to me.
M
Michael1801
Guest
Thank you Freddy.Michael1801:
I’m assuming that you are using it in a religious sense (why else capitalise it…). So no, as an atheist, the concept makes no sense to me.
I didn’t know that you were an atheist.
Now I understand your posts.
The question in the OP was directed only to those who believe in Providence.
I was asking whether the word “coincidence” can have any meaning for “us.”
I believe it can, and I’d be interested in the thoughts of other Theists here.
Especially any who’ve read Aquinas.
I’d like to know if I’m understanding him correctly.
And if I’m using the terms “per se,” “per accidens,” and “secondary causes” correctly (and if those terms help answer the question in the OP.)
Last edited:
M
Mary888
Guest
The act of believing is entirely free. That is why God gave us Commandments, He inspired many books to be written and so on. Because we have to force ourselves to believe in Him (first Commandment).
If a certain event happens that is or appears to be supernatural, a Christian is not forced to believe it is from God. WHAT we must believe is in our books and traditions. Personal revelation is to be doubted (in general). A supernatural event or situation can be interpreted by many systems of belief. It is not restricted just to God. Say you miraculously heal from a disease. A believer in God thanks God while someone who believes in self-healing is thanking themselves, someone believing in the power of plants is happy they drank that tea last night, someone who believes in horoscopes thanks the stars etc.
Plus Christianity is monotheistic but still holds on a existing conflict between God and the Enemy, so a coincidence can be attributed to God or God’s Enemy hence a Christian can safely use the idea of a “coincidence” simply by the way of avoiding to befriend the Enemy. When a believer says “coincidence” it is more like an act of wisdom, of not wanting to dwell into the significance of that strange event and this attitude of moving above the signs can also come from God (for a Christian at least). Jesus Christ said the Jews wanted signs and the Greeks wisdom and God chose the weak to make the powerful meek - so neither all sign and neither all wisdom comes from God. Also it is challenging to think who was the powerful who had to be turned meek in this case - the Greeks or the Jews? (coincidentally both Greeks and Jews have spiritual claims of superiority over others due to certain events and either one could be the wisemen who still needed to be taught a lesson? Or is it Providence that two people that God wanted to talk with but also who needed to be corrected got to meet Christ?)
If God pushed His Providence in a restrictive way over us, like in details of our thinking even, would He have allowed for us to be tempted/tested?
My conclusion so far is that in order to find Providence certain strange things have to be seen by me as coincidence. Not that I am good at doing this but seeing signs everywhere can lead one to mental disturbances that cannot, in my mind, constitute a good life in which I can help others or pray or respect His rules.
If a certain event happens that is or appears to be supernatural, a Christian is not forced to believe it is from God. WHAT we must believe is in our books and traditions. Personal revelation is to be doubted (in general). A supernatural event or situation can be interpreted by many systems of belief. It is not restricted just to God. Say you miraculously heal from a disease. A believer in God thanks God while someone who believes in self-healing is thanking themselves, someone believing in the power of plants is happy they drank that tea last night, someone who believes in horoscopes thanks the stars etc.
Plus Christianity is monotheistic but still holds on a existing conflict between God and the Enemy, so a coincidence can be attributed to God or God’s Enemy hence a Christian can safely use the idea of a “coincidence” simply by the way of avoiding to befriend the Enemy. When a believer says “coincidence” it is more like an act of wisdom, of not wanting to dwell into the significance of that strange event and this attitude of moving above the signs can also come from God (for a Christian at least). Jesus Christ said the Jews wanted signs and the Greeks wisdom and God chose the weak to make the powerful meek - so neither all sign and neither all wisdom comes from God. Also it is challenging to think who was the powerful who had to be turned meek in this case - the Greeks or the Jews? (coincidentally both Greeks and Jews have spiritual claims of superiority over others due to certain events and either one could be the wisemen who still needed to be taught a lesson? Or is it Providence that two people that God wanted to talk with but also who needed to be corrected got to meet Christ?)
If God pushed His Providence in a restrictive way over us, like in details of our thinking even, would He have allowed for us to be tempted/tested?
My conclusion so far is that in order to find Providence certain strange things have to be seen by me as coincidence. Not that I am good at doing this but seeing signs everywhere can lead one to mental disturbances that cannot, in my mind, constitute a good life in which I can help others or pray or respect His rules.
M
Michael1801
Guest
Thank you Mary888, but I’m not quite sure what you’re saying.
It sounds like you’re saying that there are no real coincidences, only apparent coincidences.
And anything that looks like a sign has to be a sign (either from God or the devil.)
But is it true that anything that looks like a sign must be a sign?
Take the young woman who walked thru the cemetery and stepped on a broken piece of headstone that had her birth date on it.
Did that have to be intended by God (or the devil) to a sign?
And if it was meant as a sign, isn’t God the only one in full control of births and deaths?
Maybe the devil could have induced that young woman to go for a walk in that cemetery, and look down at that headstone, and to have whatever thoughts she had–but could he have put it there (in that cemetery, at that time, with that date on it), without being in control of life and death?
And if Hillary Clinton and “crown her Queen” equaling 510 in Hebrew is a message from anyone, wouldn’t it have to be from God?
Isn’t He the only one who sits above time, and could make those pieces fall in place?
But must every concurrence of things or events that exists, and that God wills to exist, have to be willed for some particular purpose of it’s own?
If it looks like a sign, does it have to be a sign?
Could God not have willed the girl in the cemetery, and someone burried in that cemetery, to have been born on the same day for reasons that had nothing to do with sending anyone a sign?
If they were both born on September 9th, maybe it was for the same reason most Americans are born on that day-- it’s about 9 months after Christmas.
And maybe the headstone was broken because of vandalism in the neighborhood (which would be a result of human freewill.)
And maybe she did go for a walk in that cemetery, where she stumbled over that broken piece of headstone with her birth date on it, because the devil was messing with her mind.
Or maybe just because it was a nice day, and the cemetery was on the way to the park?
The point is, couldn’t most (or all) of these things be real coincidences?
Not just apparent coincidences, but real coincidences that God willed only per accidens?
And wasn’t Saint Aquinas saying that some things are (or do I totally misunderstand him)?
It sounds like you’re saying that there are no real coincidences, only apparent coincidences.
And anything that looks like a sign has to be a sign (either from God or the devil.)
But is it true that anything that looks like a sign must be a sign?
Take the young woman who walked thru the cemetery and stepped on a broken piece of headstone that had her birth date on it.
Did that have to be intended by God (or the devil) to a sign?
And if it was meant as a sign, isn’t God the only one in full control of births and deaths?
Maybe the devil could have induced that young woman to go for a walk in that cemetery, and look down at that headstone, and to have whatever thoughts she had–but could he have put it there (in that cemetery, at that time, with that date on it), without being in control of life and death?
And if Hillary Clinton and “crown her Queen” equaling 510 in Hebrew is a message from anyone, wouldn’t it have to be from God?
Isn’t He the only one who sits above time, and could make those pieces fall in place?
But must every concurrence of things or events that exists, and that God wills to exist, have to be willed for some particular purpose of it’s own?
If it looks like a sign, does it have to be a sign?
Could God not have willed the girl in the cemetery, and someone burried in that cemetery, to have been born on the same day for reasons that had nothing to do with sending anyone a sign?
If they were both born on September 9th, maybe it was for the same reason most Americans are born on that day-- it’s about 9 months after Christmas.
And maybe the headstone was broken because of vandalism in the neighborhood (which would be a result of human freewill.)
And maybe she did go for a walk in that cemetery, where she stumbled over that broken piece of headstone with her birth date on it, because the devil was messing with her mind.
Or maybe just because it was a nice day, and the cemetery was on the way to the park?
The point is, couldn’t most (or all) of these things be real coincidences?
Not just apparent coincidences, but real coincidences that God willed only per accidens?
And wasn’t Saint Aquinas saying that some things are (or do I totally misunderstand him)?
Last edited:
M
Michael1801
Guest
Thanks again Deb.
I was re-reading your post, and I really appreciate your comments.
I agree with most of what you said, except that I would say that those things that weren’t meant to be the signs they appeared to be at the time were (in a sense) coincidences.
For example, if the pick 3 number being 666 the day Ronald Reagan was elected president was meant to lead to this discussion here, his apparent identification with the Antichrist at the time would have been a coincidence (in that it would not be the intended message, but would only appear to be for a time.)
I think that ties in with what Augustine says about God willing some things per se, and other things per accidens.
And thank you again.
- Status