Salvation

[Voice_of_Reason_1]

The mind or intellect produces ideas such as being, goodness, truth, beauty, virtue, honour, ambition, justice, wisdom. Can any organ lay hold of such as these? Can you smell or see ideas? Can you imagine what ambition would look like, and draw a picture of it? These are individual limitations or settings which are beyond the grasp of any bodily sense organ. They require a spiritual power to comprehend them. This power is present in a spiritual substance which we call the soul.

When this is not thought through, the need for a spiritual source for a spiritual entity – the soul – is not perceived. The source or creator of the soul we call God

This really doesn’t get at the heart of my objection, but I’ll disregard that. That we can name and describe social or mental phemonena is nothing short of or more than natural. We perceive such things with the brain (that’s why mental deficients can’t conceptualize these things, soul or no soul; you’ll agree at least with that).

So why use the soul - one obscure and improbable thing - to explain yet another obscure improbable thing? Then you’ve balanced the concept of the soul and God upon each other, both of which lack the foundation you purport.

But I digress. Jesus does not save us. We can be in no way responsible for the types of wills given to us that lead us to damnation or salvation. If you say that we have the ability to choose, well then God gave some the ability to choose better than others (Clearly, since some perish). There is an infinite regression, no matter what way you look at it. I never asked to be an unbeliever, and if God would only give me the heart, I would believe. Of course, since I find it impossible to believe in such a partial God (one who doles out faith and grace to some and not others), I have no hopes for ever believing. It is easier and more reasonable for me to group the Christian God in with the Pagan ones and all the other bronze-age superstitions you would no doubt reject if you weren’t emersed in a culture which excepts such fantasies.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Having the ability to ask quiestions, you also have the ability to seek the answers – there are many proofs for the existence of God, and Jesus of Nazareth is the only one who claimed to be God of many (from Buddha, the Hindu deities, Confusius, Mohammed), and His recorded miracles followed by His witnessed resurrection attest to that.

Our ability to appreciate beauty, and to think and reason enable us to seek and find.

The mind or intellect produces ideas such as being, goodness, truth, beauty, virtue, honour, ambition, justice, wisdom. Can any organ lay hold of such as these? Can you smell or see ideas? Can you imagine what ambition would look like, and draw a picture of it? These are individual limitations or settings which are beyond the grasp of any bodily sense organ. They require a spiritual power to comprehend them. This power is present in a spiritual substance which we call the soul.

When this is not thought through, the need for a spiritual source for a spiritual entity – the soul – is not perceived. The source or creator of the soul we call God

I am seeking these answers to things.

I have dilligently tried all ways I can think of, and that people here have suggested I try.

Why is there a need for a spiritual source of anything?

 

[Abu]

Only matter, no soul, no ultimate Intelligence? Really?

There is the obvious spiritual requirement precisely because the mind or intellect produces ideas such as being, goodness, truth, beauty, virtue, honour, ambition, justice, wisdom. Can any organ lay hold of such as these? Can you smell or see ideas? Can you imagine what ambition would look like, and draw a picture of it? These are individual limitations or settings which are beyond the grasp of any bodily sense organ. They require a spiritual power to comprehend them. This power is present in a spiritual substance which we call the soul. Each of those IDEAS produced by matter? Get real.

The fact that our mental and other capacities vary and may be injured or malformed; that even if apparently in excellent condition some may commit grave crimes, merely points to the devastation caused by the Original Fall of mankind for which God’s infinite love for mankind manifested itself in His Passion, Crucifixion and Resurrection so that we would once again be able to reach our intended life with Him. It is clearly obvious that we have the capacity to choose good or evil, and that our consciences do nudge us to choose good.

If you think that you are the ultimate doubter, you might deign to contemplate the dawn of understanding of the world’s leading former atheist Anthony Flew:

.In his exclusive interview with Antony Flew Dr Benjamin Wiker uncovers why the world’s leading former atheist has rejected atheism.
tothesource.org/10_30_2007/10_30_2007.htm

Excerpts:
Anthony Flew: “There were two factors in particular that were decisive.* One was my growing empathy with the insight of Einstein and other noted scientists that there had to be an Intelligence behind the integrated complexity of the physical Universe.* The second was my own insight that the integrated complexity of life itself – which is far more complex than the physical Universe – can only be explained in terms of an Intelligent Source.* I believe that the origin of life and reproduction simply cannot beexplained from a biological standpoint despite numerous efforts to do so.

That Intelligence we call God – a spiritual being who has redeemed us from the Fall and whose followers have built Western civilization.

Salvation is available to all, but will they make the effort to gain it even when offered the opportunity? The choice is there, but no pain, no gain.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Ah, the one who Flew over the cukoo’s nest Flew?

 

[Voice_of_Reason_1]

Only matter, no soul, no ultimate Intelligence? Really?

There is the obvious spiritual requirement precisely because the mind or intellect produces ideas such as being, goodness, truth, beauty, virtue, honour, ambition, justice, wisdom. Can any organ lay hold of such as these? Can you smell or see ideas? Can you imagine what ambition would look like, and draw a picture of it? These are individual limitations or settings which are beyond the grasp of any bodily sense organ. They require a spiritual power to comprehend them. This power is present in a spiritual substance which we call the soul. Each of those IDEAS produced by matter? Get real.

The fact that our mental and other capacities vary and may be injured or malformed; that even if apparently in excellent condition some may commit grave crimes, merely points to the devastation caused by the Original Fall of mankind for which God’s infinite love for mankind manifested itself in His Passion, Crucifixion and Resurrection so that we would once again be able to reach our intended life with Him. It is clearly obvious that we have the capacity to choose good or evil, and that our consciences do nudge us to choose good.

If you think that you are the ultimate doubter, you might deign to contemplate the dawn of understanding of the world’s leading former atheist Anthony Flew:

.In his exclusive interview with Antony Flew Dr Benjamin Wiker uncovers why the world’s leading former atheist has rejected atheism.
tothesource.org/10_30_2007/10_30_2007.htm

Excerpts:
Anthony Flew: “There were two factors in particular that were decisive.* One was my growing empathy with the insight of Einstein and other noted scientists that there had to be an Intelligence behind the integrated complexity of the physical Universe.* The second was my own insight that the integrated complexity of life itself – which is far more complex than the physical Universe – can only be explained in terms of an Intelligent Source.* I believe that the origin of life and reproduction simply cannot beexplained from a biological standpoint despite numerous efforts to do so.

That Intelligence we call God – a spiritual being who has redeemed us from the Fall and whose followers have built Western civilization.

Salvation is available to all, but will they make the effort to gain it even when offered the opportunity? The choice is there, but no pain, no gain.

This isn’t a treatment of any claims that contradict your point; you’re just saying things. One part is a direct copy and paste; one part is more of the same non-descriptive religious pleading; one part is an appeal to authority, and another is an appeal to an authority by yet another appeal to authority - by proxy. Not only are such appeals spurious, they also take Einstein’s typically cautionary agnosticism and mold it into theism. It’s not hard to cut and paste Einstein’s most permissive statement about Religion. I’ll leave it up to you to find the truly damaging content in much of the rest of his writings.

 

[Della]

Originally Posted by Della View Post
He saves us from the tyranny of living in sin…
Voice of Reason:

He hasn’t done this to any Christians I’ve ever known

Living in sin is not the same thing as never sinning. Living in sin means just that–practicing sinfulness while excusing oneself. We often pay the consequences of our sin in this life if we live in sin whether we deny we are doing so or not. We can be freed from that. Of course, we must be willing to face the awful truth about ourselves on a daily basis–that we are flawed human beings in need of a Savior, and many people are unwilling to do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Della View Post
Well, he doesn’t make us into someone other than who we are as human beings, really. He makes it possible for us to be perfect human beings, by sharing his divine life with us. Yes?
Voice of Reaon:

I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that you don’t know any perfect human beings, Christian or otherwise. Surely God does not give us perfection either.

We can become perfect by God’s grace. The Church has several examples for us, people we celebrate with feasts and memorials–they’re called Saints. Each of them came to perfection through living their lives according to God’s grace. That means they faced the awful truth about themselves and allowed God to work in their hearts, minds, and souls to transform them into the image of Christ–the perfect Man.

 

[Voice_of_Reason_1]

Originally Posted by Della View Post
Living in sin means just that–practicing sinfulness while excusing oneself.

So God saves us from excusing our sinfullness. Rather than saying “this isn’t a sin” we have the power to say “this is a sin.” Any religion could have told us that (that’s merely prescribing right from wrong, which the world-over does anyway and has done since the beginning of time)

We often pay the consequences of our sin in this life if we live in sin whether we deny we are doing so or not. We can be freed from that.

People suffer sin, are rewarded for their innocence, suffer for their innocence, and are rewarded for sin at chance-probability. I have no reason to think that God has imputed some force-field over those who love him. Catholicism knew this and declared suffering to be a wonderful thing to be embraced!

Of course, we must be willing to face the awful truth about ourselves on a daily basis–that we are flawed human beings in need of a Savior, and many people are unwilling to do that.

What is God saving us from that wasn’t already in place before Jesus? If God gives us the ability to see that what we’re doing is sinful than he hasn’t given us anything that other religions and philosophies haven’t, especially since he doles out such grace with severe partiality.

We can become perfect by God’s grace. The Church has several examples for us, people we celebrate with feasts and memorials–they’re called Saints. Each of them came to perfection through living their lives according to God’s grace. That means they faced the awful truth about themselves and allowed God to work in their hearts, minds, and souls to transform them into the image of Christ–the perfect Man.

No, we have people that were sinners that were later deemed to be Saints because they were more fanatical than others about keeping to the book. That you are able to decalre someone a saint means nothing.

 

[Della]

So God saves us from excusing our sinfullness. Rather than saying “this isn’t a sin” we have the power to say “this is a sin.” Any religion could have told us that (that’s merely prescribing right from wrong, which the world-over does anyway and has done since the beginning of time)

I think you are arguing with an argument I didn’t make here. If you want to know what the Church means by saving us from our sins I suggest reading the Catechism. And no, not all religions tell us we are sinners in need of a savior. Surely you know that.

People suffer sin, are rewarded for their innocence, suffer for their innocence, and are rewarded for sin at chance-probability. I have no reason to think that God has imputed some force-field over those who love him. Catholicism knew this and declared suffering to be a wonderful thing to be embraced!

What we suffer because of our sins we’ve brought on ourselves–that’s called justice. The suffering of the innocent is another matter. A very good treatise on suffering is: Salvifici Doloris written by John Paul II. I hope it clarifies some things for you.

What is God saving us from that wasn’t already in place before Jesus? If God gives us the ability to see that what we’re doing is sinful than he hasn’t given us anything that other religions and philosophies haven’t, especially since he doles out such grace with severe partiality.

Once again, you have made up an argument of your own and are arguing against it. We have been in a fallen state since Adam and Eve. God provided a way for people to satisfy the injustice of their sins with the sacrifices of the OT. Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross satisfied them all and completed them. This isn’t rocket science nor does one need a degree in philosophy or theology to understand that. Judaism and Christianity are revealed religions–God revealed what he wanted of us to various prophets ending with his revelation to man–his Son. It’s the means he chose to save us. You’ll have to take it up with him, not me.

God does not dole out his grace–he pours out his grace. Every human being in the world has access to God’s grace. There’s a very good section in the Catechism about this. You should look it up.

No, we have people that were sinners that were later deemed to be Saints because they were more fanatical than others about keeping to the book. That you are able to decalre someone a saint means nothing.

No, we have people who were ordinary in every way who opened themselves up to God completely. Anyone can become holy through the ordinary means God provided–the sacramental life of his Church. Those declared Saints by the Church are examples of heroic virtue. But anyone can become virtuous/holy if he wishes. It means surrendering oneself to God’s will in all things–the ordinary things of life.

One of the greatest Saints of the Church was a young woman who did nothing spectacular but who is now a Doctor of the Church. She did everything in love. That’s all. It can be done–it has been done. I particularly like what G. K. Chesterton wrote about living the Faith: “Christianity hasn’t been found wanting and so not tried–it has been found difficult and so left untried.” Just try doing everything out of pure love for one day and see how far you get. It takes surrendering oneself to God to do it, whether one is a Christian, a Jew, a Hindu, a Muslim, whatever, if one avails oneself of God’s grace. But, don’t accuse God of being niggardly. He is more than generous in the way he gives us his grace.

 

[Abu]

StrawberryJam
Ah, the one who Flew over the cukoo’s nest Flew?

Flew actually flew OUT of the cuckoo’s nest because he was no longer cuckoo – having come to see a "growing empathy with the insight of Einstein and other noted scientists that there had to be an Intelligence behind the integrated complexity of the physical Universe.* The second was my own insight that the integrated complexity of life itself – which is far more complex than the physical Universe – can only be explained in terms of an Intelligent Source.*