(July 11, 2015 at 11:46 am)Metis Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 11:16 am)Randy Carson Wrote: As Jimmy Akin opines here, there are two options:

1. We are no longer able to choose sin. This still allows for free will in that we may choose between different "goods".

But to choose anything but the option that produces the maximum Good would be a bad, a sin. So there can only ever be one option, which contradicts the notion of free will.

Why?

I have two choices: I can give a dollar to a homeless person (a small good) or I can sell all my possessions, give the money to the poor, and join him (a greater good)? How have I done evil by choosing to do the small good rather than the greater good?

No, Jesus spoke of us being rewarded to varying degrees, so one who does the small good will get a smaller reward...but a reward nonetheless.

You were simply wrong on this point.

Quote:

Quote:2. Your (3). While choosing "bads" might still be possible, who would want to do so?

Shotgun Blackmail: "Do what I want or else!"

How so? Everyone in heaven is there because of their love for God and their desire to do His will. There is no shotgun blackmail when we are eager to serve God.

You were simply wrong on this point.

Quote:

Quote:Akin's 2/Your 3 does not call into question why this world was created. God created us to know and love Him, and it is here in this life that we are given an opportunity to make a free commitment--or not. Akin draws this analogy:


God values it, too.

I hope you will take a couple of minutes to read Akin's article in its entirety.

1) How is the love from a hostage at gun point any more real than a Stepford wife? I'd suggest it would be less so, since at very least the Stepford Wife cannot experience fear unless you want her to.

Is this the situation you feel we are currently in? That God is holding a gun to our heads and threatening us with hell if we don't do as he says?



Then let me ask you this: if this is the resentment you feel towards God under the current situation (with God being "silent" as some here claim), imagine how much more resentment you and others would feel if God were to make Himself more known to us AS FOLKS ARE ROUTINELY DEMANDING IN THIS FORUM.

I love it when atheists finally reach the Christian position by use of their own reasoning and logic.

Quote:2) I don't know about you, but when I met my partner I just asked him out, I didn't suspend him over a lake of fire by his ankles waving a book at him screeching "Love me or Burn!!!"

Fair enough. However, when the clock runs out on this earth, you're either with God or you aren't. It was nice of God to tell us of the next chapter and to provide the means (Jesus) by which it may go well once we turn the page.

The difference between us is this: YOU choose to focus on the stick; I tend to focus on the carrot.

(July 11, 2015 at 12:03 pm)Metis Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 11:52 am)Randy Carson Wrote: Before I address any of this, have you read Akin's article in full?

Indeed. I know he tries to explain away the inability to choose evil by impeccability but let me ask you this. Supposing I was to preform some brain surgery on you now, and I removed your capacity to feel anger and jealousy. Now, you may be a far nicer person for it but it's not due to any merit of your own, you have been forced to submit to my free will arbitrarily. You aren't "good", you're just being prevented from my power from doing "bad" things.  I am controlling you and forcing you to be calm and passive simply because it pleases me. You may like the result afterwards, but had you the capacity to feel anger you might be more than a little upset that I just decided to reprogram you like that.

It all comes back to the same problem Randy, other Christians manage to escape the loop but Catholicism is just one big hostage situation. You've got a controlling parent with a shotgun and it's his way or you're fucked. You're actually worse than fucked, at least a controlling parent can't actually torture you after you die.

If this controlling parent actually had any interest in preventing or discouraging evil or improving creation this would be one thing, but while it does condemn murderers (sometimes, we all know it enjoys a good roast heretic according to Aquinas and Tertuillan) there is no interest in correction, not even retribution since there comes a point where fair payment has been reached. There is just an interest in senseless never ending sadism, just for the fun of it.

I've always been astounded how nice Catholics can be on a ground level, but on how sadistic their theology is.

And you know this because of your careful study of Catholic theology in an orthodox Catholic degree program?

(July 11, 2015 at 12:27 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 11:50 am)Randy Carson Wrote: Your post is vague, but if you are referring to the fall of the angels then two points:

1. Note that God has given all rational beings that he made free will.
2. Angels are intellectually superior to humans and had the benefit of seeing the Beatific Vision of God prior to making their choice. Consequently, they only needed (and were given) one shot at their ultimate choice.

First of all, you dodged dealing with what I said by directing me to go all the way back from post #1333 to post #127. You guys are so good at this. Remember, You're the evangelist here, not me. When you dodge my points you only prove that you have nothing compelling to say.

Second, if the angels were superior, how can we mere humans expect to do better than they did in resisting evil. They had one shot, you say so did god wait until after Satan rebelled to remove all the bad stuff from Heaven, so it will be a different place when humans get there?

First, there was never any bad stuff in heaven.

Second, the angels were judged based upon their own individual, free-will decisions to rebel against God. God has not given them a second chance (that we know of) because they had full knowledge and chose to rebel anyway.

We are judged in part because of our individual decisions but also in part because of the sin of Adam. However, we have not seen the Beatific Vision and so, God has made a different provision for us. We have the blood, the cross and the name of Jesus to help us resist evil. More importantly, we have confession and forgiveness to restore our relationship with God when we fail.

So, God has already decided to deal with us differently than He dealt with the angels - and this may be due to his recognition that we can't "expect to do better than they did".

(July 11, 2015 at 12:56 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 11:52 am)Randy Carson Wrote: Before I address any of this, have you read Akin's article in full?

Reminds one of Mitt Romney, doesn't it? He doesn't have anything worthwhile to say so he refers us to a website or book.  This is really insulting if he thinks we are such dolts that we can't see through this rouse. For a cover, this is two inches thinner than wet tissue paper.
.

Complex questions sometimes require more response than can be easily posted in a "discussion" forum.

Consequently, referring to offsite material is a usual and customary practice - not a rouse (sic).

(July 11, 2015 at 11:54 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: In the book of the Revelation we are told that the smoke of the torment of those in hell will rise up before the lord forever.

Rev 14:11 "And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name."

So what? Why are you offended by Divine Judgement and the just condemnation of the wicked?

(July 11, 2015 at 11:50 am)Randy Carson Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 11:36 am)IATIA Wrote: So wanting to be as god and getting kicked out of heaven was good?  Taking the earth women was good?

Your post is vague ...

Then you have not read your bible.  Just reading the sunday school version does not count as it neglects to relate the full accounting of this misanthropic god of yours.

(July 11, 2015 at 12:03 pm)Metis Wrote: Indeed. I know he tries to explain away the inability to choose evil by impeccability but let me ask you this. Supposing I was to preform some brain surgery on you now, and I removed your capacity to feel anger and jealousy. Now, you may be a far nicer person for it but it's not due to any merit of your own, you have been forced to submit to my free will arbitrarily. You aren't "good", you're just being prevented from my power from doing "bad" things.  I am controlling you and forcing you to be calm and passive simply because it pleases me. You may like the result afterwards, but had you the capacity to feel anger you might be more than a little upset that I just decided to reprogram you like that.

It all comes back to the same problem Randy, other Christians manage to escape the loop but Catholicism is just one big hostage situation. You've got a controlling parent with a shotgun and it's his way or you're fucked. You're actually worse than fucked, at least a controlling parent can't actually torture you after you die.

If this controlling parent actually had any interest in preventing or discouraging evil or improving creation this would be one thing, but while it does condemn murderers (sometimes, we all know it enjoys a good roast heretic according to Aquinas and Tertuillan) there is no interest in correction, not even retribution since there comes a point where fair payment has been reached. There is just an interest in senseless never ending sadism, just for the fun of it.

I've always been astounded how nice Catholics can be on a ground level, but on how sadistic their theology is.

Oh, but it wasn't Catholics who told me god allows sin so we can have freewill. They were evangelical Christians who believed with relish that Catholics were going to fry when they die, just like the Catholics believed the same of them. If, as Randy says, god does this because he wants us to love him... well, somebody mentioned Stockholm in one of these threads.

"God just wants a relationship with you."
"No, that's okay, I'm good."
"You're going to burn forever in hell if you refuse."
"Wait, I don't get a choice?"
"Of course you get a choice.  You can choose God or not."
"But, you just said if I don't choose it I'm going to suffer for eternity."
"That's right."
"So, it's a choice... at, essentially, gun point."
"No, he just wants to share his love with you."
"...under the threat of eternal torture."
"Well, he did make you, and all of existence."
"And that justifies 'believe in me or be punished forever'?"
"Yes.  God is good.  This is part of his divine wisdom and justice."
"Wait.  How do we know god is good?"
"It says so in the Bible."
"So?  In the bible, god does a bunch of terrible things to people, often for very weak reasons."
"Who are you to question God?  We're all small creatures who cannot grasp his infinite wisdom."
"How do we know its wisdom is infinite?"
"It says so in the Bible."
"And?  We're just supposed to take the bible's word for it?"
"Yes."
"Why?  What gives it that credibility?"
"It's the divinely inspired Word of God."
"How do you know that?"
"Because it says so in the Bible."
"..."
"Why won't you accept God's love?  He just wants to love you."
"Demanding love under the threat of torture isn't love.  In any other context, you'd find that notion abhorrent.  And doling out the same punishment - one that is innately reprehensible - for all crimes, regardless of their severity, isn't justice."
"Yes it is.  Who are you to say you know better than God?"
"Well, for one, I don't believe in the existence of something just because a book of myths tells me to."
"There's historical evidence for the events in the Bible."
"But, none of that evidence points to divinity or magic.  And some of the claims in the bible, like the exodus, don't have supporting archaeological evidence to support them.  And, of course, this is moving away from the subject."
"It is."
"Okay, so, god's plan was to give everyone free will to choose whether or not to believe in and love it, correct?"
"Right."
"So, if this is all according to its plan, why is god punishing people for exercising their free will?"
"Because they're choosing sin over him."
"But, that ability to choose sin was given to people by god.  Why punish people for making that choice?"
"Because God can't abide sin."
"God created existence.  Presumably, that means god created sin.  Why can it not abide by what it created?  Or is god too weak to handle sin?"
"God is stronger than sin, he just can't standing being in the presence of it."
"Sin is so powerful that it irritates god?"
"..."
"Right.  Anyway, god has made a system where he punishes - for all eternity - people who exercise the free will it gave them.  Because they made the wrong choice."
"Exactly.  Just like here, where you have the free will to commit a crime.  Being able to commit a crime doesn't absolve you from the consequences."
"Okay.  But here, in the real world, the punishments for crimes ostensibly fit the crimes.  We don't execute someone for shoplifting, for example.  Moreover, in most cases rehabilitation is part of the process.  With god and hell, every crime has one punishment - eternal torture - and there's no chance for rehabilitation or restitution.  How is that fair?"
"It's fair because it's part of God's infinite wisdom and justice, and we're in no position to say otherwise."
"Argument from ignorance again?"
"It's all I have."

(July 11, 2015 at 1:46 pm)IATIA Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 11:50 am)Randy Carson Wrote: Your post is vague ...

Then you have not read your bible.  Just reading the sunday school version does not count as it neglects to relate the full accounting of this misanthropic god of yours.

(July 11, 2015 at 1:55 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Oh, but it wasn't Catholics who told me god allows sin so we can have freewill. They were evangelical Christians who believed with relish that Catholics were going to fry when they die, just like the Catholics believed the same of them. If, as Randy says, god does this because he wants us to love him... well, somebody mentioned Stockholm in one of these threads.

No, Rhonda. You are wrong. Catholics do not believe Protestants are going to fry when they die. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains it this way:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame." The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."