Understanding God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hitetlen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mike O:
No, this is highly relevant.

That you find teachings such as “Taking innocent unborn life is never morally licit” repellant while at the same time faulting God for allowing tsunamis to “indiscriminately mow down thousands of lives” speaks volumes about the illogic that colors your thought processes.
Actually, I don’t think that abortion is a good thing, and hopefully it will be phased out as usage of contraceptives gets more and more widespread. As far as I know no woman has ever gotten pregnant JUST so she could have an abortion. I think that being born into a loving relationship where the child will be properly taken care of is much more preferable than being born into poverty and an abusive family, and I guess, you would share this opinion.

You may think that murdering millions in a tsunami is somehow comparable to using a contraceptive, but I certainly do not share your opinion.

Be as it may, I am not going to respond to this kind of attempt to derail this tread. And also you can stop your “taunting” tone, I will not respond in kind.
 
40.png
PraRFLEsEkHm:
I am not a theologian , nor an intellectual - I just play one on TV 😛 so forgive me please if I end up complicating things.

It seems to me that the issue you are struggling with comes down to this: Type ‘A’ people are given more of the ‘juice’ to overcome and serve God as He wishes us all to do - while type ‘B’ people have to work at it. Your question, if I remember correctly, is ‘Why?’ .
Yep, that is the question. I am afraid your reply did not really answer it. If it is preferable to have love over hate, helpful behavior over murders, then it stands to reason to create circumstances where the preferable actions are propagated and the others are eliminated. And since it is possible to do so without curtailing free will, it makes no sense not to do it.
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
I am not seeking “truth”, I am seeking opinions.
Maybe it’s not truth or opinions you are seeking, but a place to massage your ego by drawing people into fruitless exercises.

Christ himself didn’t mince words when he saw something so obvious. He always spoke truth. If for no other reason, He should at least have your respect as a no-nonsense straight shooter. 😉
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
Nice to see you again 🙂 I am sure there is a lot of discussion going on considering such difficult subjects.
Thanks, you as well. I’ve been swamped with work the past week while being on vacation.

First according to the Church, Predestination is a mystery. That means we do not understand it. Why would God choose some over others we do not know. We can speculate however. Complete Predestination means that if you die in a state of grace you will go to heaven. That’s all type A is. God forces no one to choose to be in this state of grace at the close of their life. That is their will. God predestines many to receive salvific grace but not every one accepts thus they do not go to heaven. Type B is that. There is also another type of predestination by which God would destine someone for heaven without predestining them to grace. You could imagine this to be possible but many theologians doubt it has or ever will happen. Complete predestination is someone who by accepting God’s grace, dies in this state and goes to heaven. This is all that is defined by the Church under predestination.

Incomplete predestination is God predestining someone to grace or glory but not both. Neither is considered in depth under the Church’s doctrine of Predestination, which deals only with complete predestination. The grace one is easy to explain because God desires everyone’s salvation and would thus predestine them sufficient grace to do it. Again why some and not others is a mystery. Though God simply does not pass over others and it is possible these people serves ome other purpose using their grace even though they will choose against it. The latter is tricky theologically but we have to admit it is possible even though it may never happen.

Also there exist people not predestined which means they will go to hell. God does not will them to hell however. It would be a mistake to assume that. God creates no one, absolutely not one person, for the purpose of eternal damnation. This position of the damnation of those not saved is another highly debated thing within the Church.

This is dogma: God does not will sin. God permits sin, but never actively wills it. You must remember we use human terms to describe God so the disciption may fall within the realm of inadequacy. Predestination is a combination of God’s eternal will outside of time and the human will to come in union with God, which God foreknows. It is likely that most are predestined, though not all. Between 1/3 and 2/3 of people are predestined is a good guess, though we can never know.

Adam
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
Yep, that is the question. I am afraid your reply did not really answer it. If it is preferable to have love over hate, helpful behavior over murders, then it stands to reason to create circumstances where the preferable actions are propagated and the others are eliminated. And since it is possible to do so without curtailing free will, it makes no sense not to do it.
Originally Posted by PraRFLEsEkHm
Adam and Eve made a choice, to know good and evil. Knowlege of evil, true knowlege for us - requires living it…just like true knowlege of good requires living it. You can have intellectual assent, intellectual understanding of many things…but you never truly know something until you do it. Put another way - we can come to an understanding of the saints, and even emulate them to a point , but Love cannot be emulated…it can only be lived. That, it seems to me, is the true point of ‘type B’ people. Gaining intimate knowlege of the adversary, while overcoming and learning the perfection of Love - the second part is done the same way as ‘type A’ people (recieving the graces and knowlege necessary to overcome and live a life from Love), while the difference of the first part remains (intimate knowlege of evil, or sin): type ‘A’ people generally don’t go through the first. Emphasis added
I would also add to that - that love is perfected in, and by, the crucible of suffering - just as we are.

God is also JUST - we (Mankind, from the beginning) made a choice - now we have to live with it. God is letting us know, by not letting us off the hook, that He does what He says He will do.

Peace

John
 
Hitetlen,

Are you asking why God would bother creating people he knew would reject him? You could then ask the same question about angels. I know you think they are a myth. Why would God create Satan? Why not just create perfect beings? Well when orginally created all were perfect, but fell from perfection. You are basicly asking why there is evil or at least why God would create beings who would fall to evil. Is this correct?

Adam
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
Those personal conceptions are shared by millions of others.
I seem to recall one Hitetlen, on another thread, speaking about the preponderance of theists in the world, making a rather pitiable metaphor to flies crowding around a pile of excrement and urging humans to partake of it too.

The word “hypocrisy” comes to mind.
Infinity is a very easily comprehensible concept for mathematicians. The word “devine” is also a human concoction. You seem to forget that I am arguing the human concepts you and others express when you talk about God. It is just an easy “cop-out” to say: you cannot understand God. The word “God” is just a human concept, and I have no problem understanding it.
The word “God” is a human concept to someone who has not grasped the metaphysical foundations of His existence.

The divine is no more a human concoction than are the origins of the universe itself. These things existed long before the advent of human existence. Neither is it a “cop-out” to say what is true; thinking that one can understand the infinitely complex and otherwordly is absurd.
And none of them is remotely satisfactory.
According, yet again and ad infinitum, to YOUR erroneous standards.
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
Actually, I don’t think that abortion is a good thing, and hopefully it will be phased out as usage of contraceptives gets more and more widespread.
Seeking to eliminate abortion by promoting contraceptive usage will have all the efficacy of seeking to put out a fire by tossing gasoline tanks into a raging inferno. The Planned Parenthood logic you’ve employed here has long confounded even the most open-minded pro-lifers. Quoth Chesterton: “With birth control there is neither birth nor control.”
As far as I know no woman has ever gotten pregnant JUST so she could have an abortion. I think that being born into a loving relationship where the child will be properly taken care of is much more preferable than being born into poverty and an abusive family, and I guess, you would share this opinion.
I think evading gruesome dismemberment by an abortionist’s scalpel when you’ve already developed motor and sensory nerves and a thalamus (re: pain receptivity) is the best option of all.
You may think that murdering millions in a tsunami is somehow comparable to using a contraceptive, but I certainly do not share your opinion.
No. I think passing away in a tsunami in a state of grace would be, however physically detestable, far superior to subsisting in a state of mortal sin and contraceptive usage.
Be as it may, I am not going to respond to this kind of attempt to derail this tread. And also you can stop your “taunting” tone, I will not respond in kind.
Oh, it was not I but * you * who began the corrosive train of invective into which atheist-theist dialogue invariably degenerates. If you’re not out for converts for the newest neo-Sartrean fan club, I must wonder what it really is you are after, “opinion seeking” rationales notwithstanding.
 
Hitetlen,

I also am wondering why you are here. Why are you on CAF? Is it interest in religion or do you wish to correct us? I’m just curious that’s all.

Adam
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
Now, there was another thing I learned, namely that God does not predestine anyone to hell, but he does predestine some people to heaven. So there are some people who are given a generous amount of grace, who gain the necessary faith to love and serve God sufficiently well, so they will be admitted to heaven. These people of course retain their free will.

For the following discussion I will call these people “type-A” persons, because it would be too cumbersome to write every time: “those people who - through God’s grace - gain sufficent faith to enable them to be loving and obedient enough to deserve heaven via exercising their free will; those who are predestined to heaven”. Every other person I will call “type-B”, to save bandwidth.

In order to become a “type-A” person one does have to do anything, the grace and their resulting faith is a free gift from God.

I was also told that God’s grace gives the “type-B” persons a lesser amount of faith, so they can work and expand it, and hopefully they will also merit admission to heaven, though that is not assured.
No, you are confused about this. The only person I know of who ever held this view was the heretical Protestant (by that I mean that he was heretical by mainstream Protestant standards) John Milton.

Catholics argue a lot about predestination. It’s a speculative subject on which the Catholic Church has wisely not declared one particular opinion to be true.

Anyone not predestined to heaven will not be saved. That much is clear. Hence, those Catholics who say that God unconditionally predestines some to heaven are forced to admit that God passively allows the others to go to hell (without violating free willin either case). Just how this happens and how it does not violate God’s goodness and human free will is an extremely difficult philosophical/theological problem.

Today, most Catholics (like most Protestants) have moved away from this traditional view, toward a view closer to that traditionally held by Eastern Christians (the Orthodox). This would hold simply that God desires the salvation of all, and gives everyone the grace that enables them to be saved. Beyond that it’s a mystery.

A few would even suggest that it’s possible that everyone will be saved. This is a dubious view among orthodox Catholics, but it has not been condemned by the Church (the view that everyone will inevitably be saved has been condemned, but the view that everyone *may *be saved has not).

This is very difficult stuff. It touches directly on the problem of evil, which is the single strongest reason not to believe in God. So if you find it off-putting, I can’t blame you. I don’t think any single explanation is entirely satisfactory. It’s a mystery we believers have to live with, no matter which theory we adopt.
Now here comes the question: “Why did God create ‘type-B’ people?”
It’s a very difficult question, since in fact the form it takes is “why did God create people whom He knew would go to hell.” It’s more than just creating people who might or might not be saved. Obviously (whatever we believe about predestination) God knows which people will be saved and which will not. So why didn’t He just create the people whom He knew would be saved? I don’t claim to have an answer to this.

Edwin
 
40.png
adamlsp:
Hitetlen,

Are you asking why God would bother creating people he knew would reject him? You could then ask the same question about angels. I know you think they are a myth. Why would God create Satan? Why not just create perfect beings? Well when orginally created all were perfect, but fell from perfection. You are basicly asking why there is evil or at least why God would create beings who would fall to evil. Is this correct?

Adam
Yes, indeed such questions merit attention. They seem to contradict the alleged aspiration of God to have a perfect heaven, without “disturbing” elements. If someone without omnipotence seeks to achieve a goal, that is an understandable endeavor. There will be trials and errors, improvement of techniques and getting better and better results.

For someone who can create whatever he wishes, not doing a “perfect” job is, well… strange. And the usual answer that “light” needs darkness as a “backdrop”, “good” needs “evil” as a contrast are simply equivocations. After all, in heaven there is no “evil” or “darkness”, is there?
 
Hitetlen,

You’re right. In heaven there is no darkness. There is no evil. But the only supposition that makes any sense to me is that God desires there to be the kind of goodness that results from overcoming evil. God allows (*not *causes) some of His creatures to fall away from goodness so that we may have the experience of resisting evil. That is the particular kind of goodness God desires.

In the book of Revelation we are shown a host of saints who have “come out of great tribulation and washed their robes white in the blood of the Lamb.” This is the kind of saints they are. This is the kind of glory they have. A glory that has emerged from suffering and the struggle with evil, and ultimately from the atoning death of Jesus.

We are not approaching this situation from some hypothetical vantage point. We all live in a world where we know there is evil, and yet where we know there is goodness too. In the end, for me the “problem of goodness” is more powerful than the “problem of evil.” I find it difficult to explain evil given my faith in God. But I do not know how to account for or even to recognize goodness without believing in God.

If you do–if you can love and follow goodness, beauty, and truth with all your heart without believing in God–then I say go ahead. I don’t think, in the long term, this is possible. But you’re welcome to try to prove me wrong.

Edwin
 
40.png
adamlsp:
Hitetlen,

I also am wondering why you are here. Why are you on CAF? Is it interest in religion or do you wish to correct us? I’m just curious that’s all.

Adam
Simple curiosity. I enjoy talking to people with other viewpoints from mine, I can learn about their thinking process. It would be so boring to talk with people with whom I would be in agreement. What can anyone learn by talking into a mirror?

True, sometimes it can be frustrating, but that adds some spice to it. Not everyone is polite around here, even though the overwhelming majority of the posters are very polite. Those who are not do not merit attention, and I usually just disregard them.
 
40.png
Contarini:
No, you are confused about this. The only person I know of who ever held this view was the heretical Protestant (by that I mean that he was heretical by mainstream Protestant standards) John Milton.

Catholics argue a lot about predestination. It’s a speculative subject on which the Catholic Church has wisely not declared one particular opinion to be true.

Anyone not predestined to heaven will not be saved. That much is clear. Hence, those Catholics who say that God unconditionally predestines some to heaven are forced to admit that God passively allows the others to go to hell (without violating free willin either case). Just how this happens and how it does not violate God’s goodness and human free will is an extremely difficult philosophical/theological problem.

Today, most Catholics (like most Protestants) have moved away from this traditional view, toward a view closer to that traditionally held by Eastern Christians (the Orthodox). This would hold simply that God desires the salvation of all, and gives everyone the grace that enables them to be saved. Beyond that it’s a mystery.

A few would even suggest that it’s possible that everyone will be saved. This is a dubious view among orthodox Catholics, but it has not been condemned by the Church (the view that everyone will inevitably be saved has been condemned, but the view that everyone *may *be saved has not).

This is very difficult stuff. It touches directly on the problem of evil, which is the single strongest reason not to believe in God. So if you find it off-putting, I can’t blame you. I don’t think any single explanation is entirely satisfactory. It’s a mystery we believers have to live with, no matter which theory we adopt.

It’s a very difficult question, since in fact the form it takes is “why did God create people whom He knew would go to hell.” It’s more than just creating people who might or might not be saved. Obviously (whatever we believe about predestination) God knows which people will be saved and which will not. So why didn’t He just create the people whom He knew would be saved? I don’t claim to have an answer to this.

Edwin
Excellent post, thank you! To say that the problem is confusing sums it up very well. 🙂
 
40.png
Contarini:
Hitetlen,

You’re right. In heaven there is no darkness. There is no evil. But the only supposition that makes any sense to me is that God desires there to be the kind of goodness that results from overcoming evil. God allows (*not *causes) some of His creatures to fall away from goodness so that we may have the experience of resisting evil. That is the particular kind of goodness God desires.
Another great post. In my eyes the “good” that overcame “evil” in not better than a simple, existing “good”. It brings up a strange concept that it is better to be “bad” first, then struggle and become “good”. Why is this preferable?
40.png
Contarini:
We are not approaching this situation from some hypothetical vantage point. We all live in a world where we know there is evil, and yet where we know there is goodness too. In the end, for me the “problem of goodness” is more powerful than the “problem of evil.” I find it difficult to explain evil given my faith in God. But I do not know how to account for or even to recognize goodness without believing in God.
I could give you my views on the matter, but it would have to be in a new thread.
40.png
Contarini:
If you do–if you can love and follow goodness, beauty, and truth with all your heart without believing in God–then I say go ahead. I don’t think, in the long term, this is possible. But you’re welcome to try to prove me wrong.

Edwin
That is very kind of you.
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
During these months I learned quite a bit about how Catholics think about God, how they understand him.
And probably you need to start again from letter “a”.
As it has been said before (post # 10): Catholics do not understand God. And it seems that you do not understand that Catholics do not understand God. Why? It has also been said before (post # 15): Because He is “incomprehensible”.
You should have titled your thread: “Blaming God”.
That’s all your fireworks are about.
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
Not everyone is polite around here, even though the overwhelming majority of the posters are very polite. Those who are not do not merit attention, and I usually just disregard them.
so why your account has been under review?
 
40.png
Hitetlen:
if I would believe in God, I would also believe that everyone would end in heaven.
nice! all your ways end in hell: because of atheism, because of heresy!
 
40.png
Contarini:
Catholics argue a lot about predestination. It’s a speculative subject on which the Catholic Church has wisely not declared one particular opinion to be true.
Before asserting that try to study the decrees about predestination of the Synods of Orange, Quiercy, and Valence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top