J
JapaneseKappa
Guest
Did you will yourself into existence?Wouldn’t that interfere with that “free will” thingy?
Did you will yourself into existence?Wouldn’t that interfere with that “free will” thingy?
Not that I know of. But I fail to see how that’s relevant.Did you will yourself into existence?
Because if people don’t will themselves into existence then God’s refusal to create people wouldn’t be a contradiction of their will.Not that I know of. But I fail to see how that’s relevant.
The whole question assumes God created “bad” people…which is also an odd concept IMO.
But I reckon this is one of those questions that IMO had a really “well duh” answer, but will nevertheless fascinate people no end and spawn long pseudointellectual diatribes.
![]()
You’re overthinking the matter.Because if people don’t will themselves into existence then God’s refusal to create people wouldn’t be a contradiction of their will.
So you’re saying you prefer answers that only make sense as long as you don’t think about them?You’re overthinking the matter.
Like I said, it’s customary here.
IMHO
No, I didn’t say that.So you’re saying you prefer answers that only make sense as long as you don’t think about them?
How can you overthink your possible eternal life?You’re overthinking the matter.
Like I said, it’s customary here.
IMHO
How does overthinking it influence or change it in any way?How can you overthink your possible eternal life?
1 Tim 2:Hardly, saving a soul from eternal suffering isn’t cold or indifferent. It would be the expression of a desire for souls to not end up in hell.
Nobody has.I’m not sure how I missed the point.
A. If some one, or some people have free will, we cannot make any conclusions about the population of hell (e.g. that it would be non-zero)
“Reasonable” only to a habitual sinner who wants to blame God for his sinfulness. Who not only wants to sin but also to get away with sinning.B. It is therefore perfectly reasonable to inquire “why wouldn’t God create a state where the population of hell was exactly zero?”
It may be valid but it is not sound. If it was sound God would have done it. Clearly what IS is not what you propose, therefore it could not be done.C. Not creating people who would end up in hell is a perfectly valid method by which God could have created a zero-population hell.
You’re really citing “Google” as a source for a philosophical or theological definition of “eternity”?So eternity is finite?
The problem is that God and eternity are too dynamic to be reduced to mathematical formulas or diagrams. Thus your understanding will always fall short because you cannot move past the need to measure God according to the rule with which you have to measure Him.I used the terms I did because they have specific meanings related to how I understand God and his relationship to our time. There are good reasons for using these concrete and precise terms; for example I could easily draw diagrams explaining my understanding of the relationship between God, eternity, and our timeline. I wonder if your understanding is concrete enough to do so.
Another translation is:1 Tim 2:
3] This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
[4] who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
God provides a certain way for souls to be saved from hell so that they not wind up there that doesn’t require Him to violate neither His nature nor theirs.
Again, the only souls who wind up in hell are their by their own desire, not God’s.
I happen to believe that time and eternity are two different things, not two different ways of looking at the same thing.You’re really citing “Google” as a source for a philosophical or theological definition of “eternity”?
How about you try something slightly more sophisticated?
What I do know is that eternity is not “endless time” or and “infinite timeline” but instead an “a state of being unbounded by time”.
Mathematicians are not the only ones who try to put God in a “box”.The problem is that God and eternity are too dynamic to be reduced to mathematical formulas or diagrams. Thus your understanding will always fall short because you cannot move past the need to measure God according to the rule with which you have to measure Him.
Your attempts to bring God down to your level via mathematics is about as prideful as it is vain. So there is really nothing “concrete” about your understanding at all, only your misunderstanding that a Being such as God can be concretized into mathematical axioms.
The NAB is not a good translation but rather leaves much to be desired in terms of accuracy. Much of the process of translation included too much influence in translation from protestantism.Another translation is:
3This is good and pleasing to God our savior,
4who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth.
In the translation that I provided, it is not just God’s desire but is GOD’S WILL.
Jesus did teach us to pray, “…They Kingdom come, Thy WILL be done…”, could be that praying for God’s Will, rather than just saying the words, just might be the most powerful thing that God has put into our hands.
Could be that God’s Will will, ultimately, come to Fruition and that God had this in God’s Plan even before creation even if we think that God is incapable of having God’s Will Be Done!
You mean like the “box” that God somehow owes everyone a ticket to heaven just because He created and redeemed them regardless whether they want it or not?Mathematicians are not the only ones who try to put God in a “box”.
Eternity just “is”?Eternity just is and time was created.
Is there or is there not a “Last Day” mentioned in Scripture?Will time last forever or will God uncreate time?
Apparently not!Code:**oldcelt**
Is this one of the reasons why the NAB is the bible translation on the USCCB website?The NAB is not a good translation but rather leaves much to be desired in terms of accuracy. Much of the process of translation included too much influence in translation from protestantism.
Since God Is God, could be that God has a good reasons to do what God does.Specifically with regards to the use of “wills” in 1 Timothy 2, and your faulty interpretation of it, how do you square your interpretation with this verse from Romans 9:
From the NAB:
18 Consequently, he has mercy upon whom he wills, and he hardens whom he wills.
(RSV)
18] So then he has mercy upon whomever he wills, and he hardens the heart of whomever he wills.
What do you mean either or?There’s an apparent contradiction in your thought process. Either God “wills” all to be saved, or God “hardens whom He wills.”
So how do you explain this?
Not the “box” that God owes but maybe the “box” that God cares, but I do not look at God caring for ALL as putting God in a “box”.You mean like the “box” that God somehow owes everyone a ticket to heaven just because He created and redeemed them regardless whether they want it or not?
Is that the box you are referring to?
I would say that eternity is not God since God Is a Being of Love and I don’t think of eternity as a Being.Eternity just “is”?
Is eternity the same thing as God?
Yes there is a Last Day mentioned in Scripture but there is nothing in Scripture, that I know of, that says the Last Day ends, do you know of any?Is there or is there not a “Last Day” mentioned in Scripture?
It’s approved for use by the Bishops, but there is no small consensus which confirms that the NAB as a translation is lacking in many respects in regards to accuracy.Is this one of the reasons why the NAB is the bible translation on the USCCB website?
There’s “both-and” in regards to Jesus’ nature. There’s “both-and” in regards to faith and works.What do you mean either or?
Ever heard of both and!
God does not do meaningless self-contradictions because by definition they are meaningless, therefore they cannot be for good reasons.God does both and God does both for very good reasons.
You’re begging the question again.Since I am not God, I do not “know” why but it could be that those that God “hardens”, God isn’t hardening them so that they can go to hell for ever and ever and…, but ultimately for just the opposite.
Because in verse 22 Paul writes: “(God)…has endured with much patience the vessels of wrath made for destruction”Do you or anyone else think that God hardening someone’s heart means that that someone is going to go to hell for ever and ever or could it be that God hardening someone’s heart is for a reason that God knows, so that, ultimately, God’s Will for ALL to be saved, will come to Fruition?
I’ve already said this before but apparently it bears repeating: Redemption is not the same as Salvation.Could be that since God Is God, God knows what God is doing and God becoming One of us and dying for All of us in not in vain.
I can’t help it because none of your comments make any real sense.You speak of contradiction and contradictory quite often, however,
Which, again, makes no sense.…it could be that things that appear contradictory to us are complimentary to God.
You say these things as if they’re so ultimately profound. You do realize that there are things that we do know with certainty through what God has revealed, don’t you?Just as it is written, “My Ways are not your ways and My Thoughts are not your thoughts”.
Only God knows just how everything fits together.
Which is precisely the way I’m beginning to think in regards to this discussion with you.“They have eyes but do not see, they have ears but do not hear”.