Question about taking license- theology/philosophy

[franklinstower]

i have a neighbor who is being very persistent in a disagreement with me about theology. he is a member of the latter day saints, a Mormon.

his argument is that there is no need to take precautions about dangers that exist because our time of death is already predetermined. since it is predetermined there is no need to be careful about illness (like covid 19) because you cant die unless it is your time.

i feel like this is encouraging a kind of recklessness about the value of life and our role in caring for it. it seems to be like where the devil tempts Jesus to throw himself from a high place because God will take care of him.

i wish i could state the question better than that but don’t have the language. his argument goes against all of my understanding of Christianity and Catholicism but i don’t know where to begin or how to answer that.

any theological help or correction would be appreciated.

 

[Wesrock]

This kind of assumes we have some type of extremely libertarian free will up until our appointed hour. Our actions, agency, and choices for are accounted for in God’s plan. He knows if someone will keep their distance from contagious diseases or be cavalier about it, and he accounts for that. It doesn’t mean he can walk freely unscathed through danger, that God shields him from disease in some special way.

 

[mwb85611]

By his logic, should his house be on fire, he should be more than content to carry out his day and not leave the burning building. Or he would be up for a vacation to Chernobyl. Or walk up to a bear if encountered in the woods. I doubt he would do any of those things, so his argument falls pretty flat.

He has knowledge that there is a danger, and is ignoring it. Just a lazy excuse to not be inconvenienced by a mask.

 

[Nicene]

Humor: I know who is winning the Darwin award this week

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[franklinstower]

thanks for the replies but i am looking more for a philosophical or theological underpinning for the discussion. i know his argument is wrong but do not have sufficient language to describe it. i am thinking it is a kind of determinism and also there must be license in this. his position takes license but that is about as far as my knowledge goes on this topic.

 

[mwb85611]

It’s not really a theological debate. He just has an illogical argument, one that doesn’t seem to have anything to do with predestination, double predestination, pelagianism, free will, ect.

But I bet he’d be a blast to go sky diving with. If it’s not his time, it won’t matter if he doesn’t open the chute.

 

[Mrchatsworth]

So the first thing I’d point out is his beliefs are not something his faith teaches. Then perhaps ask him if stopping someone’s death would be contrary to God’s will. Should we abort babies without attempt to stop, would he merely watch as someone were attacked and murdered, would he advise doctors to refrain from life saving treatment? The way you present the argument as philosophical does too much credit to his grasp on theology or philosophy, because his position, as you state it lacks basic logic. I’m not trying to be mean, just wondering if a logical theological argument here is even going to be comprehended.

 

[Mrchatsworth]

I think he sounds like a fatalist. You can google that term and see if that describes him

 

[Organist78]

I would argue that this is fine for him to believe. This does not entail we all believe this way. Catholics and most Christians do not believe in pre-determinism. We believe that God gave us a free will; that our choices determine who we are. We also believe that we can, to an extent shape our destines through our choices. It is granted that God is ultimately in control, our freedom does not effect God’s sovereignty and all things work together for God’s glory.

Calvinists believe in predestination–at least the hard core Calvinists, but predestination has to so with salvation. I am not sure whether they believe in pre-determinism.

The fact that God is watching us, the fact that God is sovereign, the fact that we are God’s children is no excuse for acting imprudently and testing fate. Scripture tells us not to put God to the test. Thus, when we know that a virus is a threat—prudence dictates that we listen to the experts. It is one thing to act prudently and have Faith in God, quite another to act stupidly.

So if your Mormon friend wants to believe that restrictions are not necessary, fine for him and his Mormon friends. In their Mormon church, temple, whatever—they can throw caution to the wind and do what they want–assuming the governor in their state has not restricted crowd size.