Cradlers

[Jonahdog]

I should not presume to teach you anything new about Catholicism! I was only in public school for my K-12 education.

I will try to explain my earlier post, but it is likely that you will be able to correct me, if need be.


God, having created time, exists outside (or independently) of time. God does not have a past, present, and future, in the way that your or I do. He is the Alpha and Omega, the eternal I Am (note the present tense). He is, literally, ever-present (is, was, will be - all at once).

From God's extra-temporal perspective, the Creation is now. The Crucifixion is now. Men are making free choices now. The Endtimes are now.

Remember, time is inextricable from space - Einstein proved that. Meaning prior (I use the term loosely) to space (the physical universe), there was no time. And whatever brought about time and space exists outside of them. This thing - this non-temporal (eternal), non-spatial, logically necessary, uncaused cause - I call God.

What do you call it?

I don't call it anything, other than made up.

But the underlying sciency question then is, based on the evidence we have, the universe is 13+ billions of years old, the earth about 4. Life has been around on the earth for 3 billion + years. Humans evolved. Every living thing has evolved from when life started. did the Catholic god just start everything or has he directed things from time to time?? And if directed, when and how? Did he move the continents around? Did he push the asteroid that hit the earth and caused dino extinction? When did he reach down and touch the original Adam and Eve out there in Africa?

And perhaps the real underlying theological question, if the Catholic god is present all the time, all at once, thereby knowing all, how does he even care for his creation if he allowed it to get screwed up? Allowed disease? Or is it just a game because we are as ants to him? but that cannot be the case if he sent his son to be tortured and killed for us (which raises all sorts of other interesting questions as to your deity's motivation and needs)

 

[glassjester]

I don't call it anything, other than made up.

You could do that, if it wasn't for its logical necessity.

But physical existence had a cause. Whatever that cause is, it's called God. You may think the universe caused itself - in which case the universe is your God (creator). But you cannot deny the uncaused cause, itself. It is logically necessary.

But the underlying sciency question then is, based on the evidence we have, the universe is 13+ billions of years old, the earth about 4. Life has been around on the earth for 3 billion + years. Humans evolved. Every living thing has evolved from when life started.

I agree.

did the Catholic god just start everything or has he directed things from time to time?? And if directed, when and how? Did he move the continents around? Did he push the asteroid that hit the earth and caused dino extinction?

He did all of it. Without Him, none of it would have happened. Without Him, none of it could exist. He's creating all of this right now. If He stopped, for even a second, calling us into being - we'd cease to exist immediately.

When did he reach down and touch the original Adam and Eve out there in Africa?

I don't know - maybe half a million years ago? It may not be possible for us to know when the first conscious human came about.

And perhaps the real underlying theological question, if the Catholic god is present all the time, all at once, thereby knowing all, how does he even care for his creation if he allowed it to get screwed up? Allowed disease? Or is it just a game because we are as ants to him?

I suggest you read The Problem of Pain by C.S. Lewis. Your questions are valid ones, and are classically known as the "problem of evil." They have been addressed many times by many theologians. Lewis' book is concise and beautiful - very much worth reading.

The short answer is that God has given us free will. He created us that He may love us, and we may love Him. But love must be given freely, or else it isn't love. This means we have the choice to not act lovingly - to sin.

but that cannot be the case if he sent his son to be tortured and killed for us

Exactly.

(which raises all sorts of other interesting questions as to your deity's motivation and needs)

I agree. Questions that have been asked and answered many times through the centuries since the Crucifixion. Ask those questions; they're important. But don't stop there. Search for the answers. They're important, too.

 

[jsanford108]

Ah, musings. No I would rather accept facts. There is no need for a god, or for the Christian one in particular.
Ignoring the real world and depending on the musings of 13th century monks, or 13th century anyone, and ignoring what we know today is irrational.

You interchange terms in order to present your opinion as superior. It is "musings" if the conclusion is theist, but "facts" if it is anti-theist.

We utilize 13th century mathematics today. You would not call that irrational. Furthermore, there are no rational pieces of evidence in existence today that disprove the existence of God.

 

[Jonahdog]

You interchange terms in order to present your opinion as superior. It is "musings" if the conclusion is theist, but "facts" if it is anti-theist.

We utilize 13th century mathematics today. You would not call that irrational. Furthermore, there are no rational pieces of evidence in existence today that disprove the existence of God.

Do we use 13th century physics and astronomy or biology or chemistry. Please.
Unless I am mistaken you first used the term "musings". If not, I apologize.

 

[Jonahdog]

You could do that, if it wasn't for its logical necessity.

But physical existence had a cause. Whatever that cause is, it's called God. You may think the universe caused itself - in which case the universe is your God (creator). But you cannot deny the uncaused cause, itself. It is logically necessary.





I agree.




He did all of it. Without Him, none of it would have happened. Without Him, none of it could exist. He's creating all of this right now. If He stopped, for even a second, calling us into being - we'd cease to exist immediately.





I don't know - maybe half a million years ago? It may not be possible for us to know when the first conscious human came about.




I suggest you read The Problem of Pain by C.S. Lewis. Your questions are valid ones, and are classically known as the "problem of evil." They have been addressed many times by many theologians. Lewis' book is concise and beautiful - very much worth reading.

The short answer is that God has given us free will. He created us that He may love us, and we may love Him. But love must be given freely, or else it isn't love. This means we have the choice to not act lovingly - to sin.




Exactly.




I agree. Questions that have been asked and answered many times through the centuries since the Crucifixion. Ask those questions; they're important. But don't stop there. Search for the answers. They're important, too.

I've read Lewis, I've read Schaeffer. Yes, the universe had a beginning but there is no need to call it anything.

I find your need to have your god thinking of everything all the time else it would disappear, just silly. Perhaps he should stop thinking of cancer for a bit.

Sorry, your arguments do not strike me as based in fact or rational

 

[glassjester]

I've read Lewis, I've read Schaeffer. Yes, the universe had a beginning but there is no need to call it anything.

A beginning, yes. And a cause. Something caused it to be.

We can reason about what the characteristics of this cause must be.

I find your need to have your god thinking of everything all the time else it would disappear, just silly. Perhaps he should stop thinking of cancer for a bit.

You seem to be using human suffering as an argument against God's existence. Are you?

Sorry, your arguments do not strike me as based in fact or rational

That's a bare assertion. Care to elaborate?

 

[glassjester]

You seem to be using human suffering as an argument against God's existence. Are you?

What I mean is - are you saying that you would believe in God, if not for human suffering? Or does human suffering actually have no bearing on your belief or disbelief in God?

 

[Jonahdog]

What I mean is - are you saying that you would believe in God, if not for human suffering? Or does human suffering actually have no bearing on your belief or disbelief in God?

No, human suffering has no impact on whether or not I believe in any god. However it does seem to give the lie to the god who is supposed to be LOVE. And since you believe your god is creating all of existence right now, is he also creating cancer? birth defects? Seems to me you cannot have a god who is creating all the good stuff right now without him being responsible for all the bad stuff as well.

 

[glassjester]

Seems to me you cannot have a god who is creating all the good stuff right now without him being responsible for all the bad stuff as well.

It seems to you there cannot be a god of any kind. So why the focus on human suffering? Why should we waste time discussing the problem of evil? Even if you had an answer to it that satisfied you perfectly, it would be moot. You'd simply shrug it off and go on not believing in any god.

If I am wrong - if it is worth discussing - tell me.

 

[Nihilo]

The RESURRECTION either happened, or it didn't happen. No other option.

 

[patrick jane]

No, human suffering has no impact on whether or not I believe in any god. However it does seem to give the lie to the god who is supposed to be LOVE. And since you believe your god is creating all of existence right now, is he also creating cancer? birth defects? Seems to me you cannot have a god who is creating all the good stuff right now without him being responsible for all the bad stuff as well.

Humans are responsible for the bad stuff, ever since Adam

 

[Jonahdog]

Humans are responsible for the bad stuff, ever since Adam

But someone said your god keeps everything going, so it seems you disagree with that.

 

[Jonahdog]

It seems to you there cannot be a god of any kind. So why the focus on human suffering? Why should we waste time discussing the problem of evil? Even if you had an answer to it that satisfied you perfectly, it would be moot. You'd simply shrug it off and go on not believing in any god.

If I am wrong - if it is worth discussing - tell me.

Correct, there is no god of any kind. I did not mean to focus on suffering. But the issue of suffering is one that can be used to deny the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing god. Christians then fall back on The Fall. Which you can only accept if you buy the basic story. I was only trying to make a point. It is not worth discussing.

 

[Jonahdog]

The RESURRECTION either happened, or it didn't happen. No other option.

Correct, and I have no problem accepting that it did not happen.

 

[Truster]

The king’s heart is like a stream of water directed by Yah Veh; he guides it wherever he pleases.
— Proverbs 21:1

But Yah Veh hardened Pharaoh’s heart and he would not listen to Moses and Aaron…
— Exodus 9:12​

 

[glassjester]

Correct, there is no god of any kind. I did not mean to focus on suffering. But the issue of suffering is one that can be used to deny the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing god. Christians then fall back on The Fall. Which you can only accept if you buy the basic story. I was only trying to make a point. It is not worth discussing.

You haven't exactly undermined two millennia of Christian theology by simply repeating the Epicurean Paradox. And it would be naive (or perhaps smug) to think so. It's been dealt with countless times.

 

[Jonahdog]

You haven't exactly undermined two millennia of Christian theology by simply repeating the Epicurean Paradox. And it would be naive (or perhaps smug) to think so. It's been dealt with countless times.

Well, not really trying to undermine anything. You can believe what you wish based on your Holy Book and what you have been taught throughout your life. I did once and then determined that there was insufficient evidence of any god.
As far as the Epicurean Paradox goes, you only get past it when you admit that human free will somehow trumps your god's power. The evil that men do, they do because they can. Your god is unable or unwilling to do anything about it. And then there are natural bad things your god is unwilling or unable to do anything about---disease, natural disasters, birth defects. Fundamentalists write it all off the The Fall. What do you, as a Catholic, write it off to?

 

[glassjester]

Well, not really trying to undermine anything. You can believe what you wish based on your Holy Book and what you have been taught throughout your life. I did once and then determined that there was insufficient evidence of any god.
As far as the Epicurean Paradox goes, you only get past it when you admit that human free will somehow trumps your god's power. The evil that men do, they do because they can. Your god is unable or unwilling to do anything about it.

The creation of something from nothing (which the first cause must have done) implies omnipotence. So God being unable to stop evil actions must be crossed off the list. That leaves "unwilling" as the only answer. And yes, our free will is the cause of God's "unwillingness" - His permissive will allows us to make choices (with consequences) and grants us moral agency.

And then there are natural bad things your god is unwilling or unable to do anything about---disease, natural disasters, birth defects.

For the atheist, there is nothing objectively evil or bad. Because, for the atheist, there is nothing objectively good. No paradox there.

Fundamentalists write it all off the The Fall. What do you, as a Catholic, write it off to?

I do not know what the specific events of The Fall were. But I know that it means the first human being with a conscience (and every one since) acted unconscionably. The first being on Earth with the ability to think, "It would be wrong for me to do this," went and did it anyway (whatever this might have been).

Because of this, we are subject to natural evils, evil actions, and to physical death.

 

[Nihilo]

Well, not really trying to undermine anything. You can believe what you wish based on your Holy Book and what you have been taught throughout your life. I did once and then determined that there was insufficient evidence of any god.
As far as the Epicurean Paradox goes, you only get past it when you admit that human free will somehow trumps your god's power. The evil that men do, they do because they can. Your god is unable or unwilling to do anything about it. And then there are natural bad things your god is unwilling or unable to do anything about---disease, natural disasters, birth defects. Fundamentalists write it all off the The Fall. What do you, as a Catholic, write it off to?

Working out my own salvation with fear and trembling for decades now, I've found no answer to this very serious matter, more satisfying, more beautiful, more complete, more perfect, than that of the Church's official pastors.

If God the Father almighty, the Creator of the ordered and good world, cares for all his creatures, why does evil exist? To this question, as pressing as it is unavoidable and as painful as it is mysterious, no quick answer will suffice. Only Christian faith as a whole constitutes the answer to this question . . . .

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p4.htm#309

 

[glassjester]

Perhaps he should stop thinking of cancer for a bit.

I was reminded of this comment last night, and the following question occurred to me.

Is cancer the only natural evil that God should prevent?