So, the CEO of McDonalds personally created a child who they knew would grow up and someday broil her lap with hot coffee. When the momentous date arrived, they made sure the coffee was nice and hot. Then they sold her the hot coffee and in a dramatic slow motion sequence, the woman drops her coffee and the CEO holds down a button to make sure the coffee gives her a good scalding.Evidently it was McDonald’s fault, according to a court of law, that an elderly lady spilled hot coffee on her lap. So she was awarded a heap of money. In our modern society, people try to pin the blame on someone else, even on a corporation like McDonald’s just serving its customers. An old event, but a relevant analogy. . . I think.
He chooses not to transmit the “evil” but to enable it… just like He enables “good” things. If God were to constantly and miraculously change everything we wouldn’t have actual free will… we would only have freedom of thought. Actual free will is what God recognizes as “good”… not just that we think about good and bad but that we can actually do them.
Its apparent Spock believes free will only exist for non christians since he already admitted no one but the individual is resposible for their own behavior so I’m not sure what he’s even arguingHe chooses not to transmit the “evil” but to enable it… just like He enables “good” things. If God were to constantly and miraculously change everything we wouldn’t have actual free will… we would only have freedom of thought. Actual free will is what God recognizes as “good”… not just that we think about good and bad but that we can actually do them.
That is the definition of free will… it is not volition.
A good example:
A father gives a bike to his young child and lets him ride the bike.
The child doesn’t know how to stand in it, so he falls. The kid gets hurt but tries again… and again… and again… until he finally learns how to ride the bike.
Someone could ask, why didn’t the father put him on little wheels (those little ones that you attach to the big ones)? Did he want the child to get hurt? No. Did he know the child would get hurt? Probably (let’s say so). What he really wanted was to let his son learn how to ride a bike and experience it. Is the father responsible for his injuries? Indirectly we could argue for it… Does it matter? You tell me.
I was just trying to give an example or analogy according to Spock’s thinking where the individual is not responsible for an act s/he chose using free will, but it was McDonald’s Corporation – equivalent to God taking the blame for all of our mischief. You filled in the details to a" tea" . . . oops, I meant the other beverage. (Forgive the pun).
That doesnt make Him RESPONSIBLE
Mr Spock, I have a question for you for when you return. As a Catholic I run into a fair number of people who’re involved in peace and social justice issues, most of them Catholic themselves. Some of them pour their whole their lives into this work. Seeing as you’re so obviously concerned with the injustice and evils that befall people in this world, would it be correct to assume that you’re one of those people who do everything with there own power to right such wrongs?
Firstly; God does not know what he has not created. If God has never created something, if it is not in Gods eternal will to bring a being into existence, then the history or future of that being does not exist in Gods knowledge. Because “God” by definition exist outside of time, it is necessarily the case that the entirety of Creation, including the will to create it, and all of time, exists simultaneously with Gods knowledge. Thus God only knows the future sins of a creature because God has eternally created that creature.
You don’t understand. The one who gives the freedom is responsible for the results of giving that freedom. If you open the door on the cage of some rabid dogs, and let them out, you will be responsible for the result of their actions, but not for their actions. Do you see the difference? Hint: the difference is huge!
There is no context. The dogmas are the final distilled “products”, which need to extra explanation. Each of them must be read individually, according to what they say.
How do you know that “most of them” are Catholics? Sounds nice, but do you survey everyone and keep a running total? Yes, I am concerned about the problems in the world. I do whatever I feel comfortable doing to alleviate them. Alas, my powers are limited. Given more power to help others while sutting in my armchair, I would do more, as much as my increased power would permit. If my powers would be sufficient to alleviate all the problems in the world, I would fix all of them. Satisfied?
Most of them are Catholics because because I run in those circles
, which I mentioned. I’m aware that non-Catholics do such things as well-but this kind of behavior also tends to be a Catholic/Christian “mandate” of sorts, i.e. we’ve been told to feed the poor and stand up for justice from the beginning. And yes, of course I’m satisfied to find out that you’re not merely pointing the finger at God or anyone else for doing less than they could do while doing less yourself. Our actions speak the loudest.Indeed, actions speak louder than a million words. I value and appreciate what anyone (be they Catholics, Christians or others) perform to help the ones in need.
Well, the Catholic faith teaches us that man exiled himself from God, sort of winning that title for ourselves, preferring the distance. So we’re to be the gods of this world, destroying each other if we like or feeding the poor and loving each other if we like. So Jesus said, paraphrasing, ‘whatever you did for the least of these, you did for me’. God gave us the possibility to love and a demonstration of it-we can choose. To the extent we choose to love and put it in action, we’re obeying Him, even if we might say, “no” to His formal call, according to the Parable of the two Sons.
That is all very well. But, you see, God is supposed to love us. And real love - as we agreed - must manifest itself in actions. So God’s love is not what I would call “real” - since there are no actions. A parent does forgive his child for a simple act of disobedience.
There are actions. I have experienced them, seen them and know witnesses to them. Of course, you will not believe me because you think I am an extremely deluded person. Granted, I myself cannot make definitive proofs of God (although they are damn good according to an atheist friend) and see some good (but not definitive) arguments against. But, I still believe in God only because of my witness to it and others. My own witness I can barely trust, but those of other, I trust a whole bunch.
Actually, the biblical description does support that Adam and Eve exiled themselves. This is why I keep saying that atheists should not use the Bible. As believers, we know we are faulty and we continue to try to make reparations of our sins. We do not wish to distance ourselves. We actually wish to make ourselves closer but due to the Fall of Man, our nature is corrupted which goes to the Redemption of Man by Christ. There is an action you completely missed.
You all are not the “bad ones”. Protestants might say that because they believe in Faith Alone which is completely false. They think that all they need is an intellectual assent and a verbal public statement saying, “Yes, I accept the Lord as my Savior.” Then, they are automatically accepted into Heaven. But, belief and Faith are MUCH MUCH more than just the intellectual assent. According to your previous post, you yourself said you like to help others in need and certainly appreciate it. You even went out of your way to help somebody else. God will give to each according to their deeds. Good deeds to the resurrection of life. God is more reasonable than you think. (The Catholic God anyway. Certainly not the Evangelical concept of God.) Doing good things feels good and there is a reason for that.
God speaks and acts. If He did not, this world would not exist nor would the Redemption of Man. Of course, that is seen as debatable.
Hey Spock,