DID GOD CREATE THE BEST OF ALL POSSIBLE WORLDS???

by Terry 60 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

Terry

Questions for Terry:
1) Do you have any children Terry?
2) Are they mechanisms?
3) What is their purpose?
4) If it would make them behave as Terry wants, would Terry circumscribe their free will?
I have seven children. They could be defined a number of different way "technically". Saying "mechanism" obviously is insulting to you. Pick the word choice you prefer. How about instead of "mechanism" I say the "whatever causes you to choose A instead of B"? Okay?
As a parent I know more about how the world works than young children can possible yet know.
The most difficult part of child-rearing is two parts:
1. Keeping the child's willfull behavior from placing them in harm's way until they develop a sense of comportment.
2. Instilling within the child a respect for their own ability to creat a life for themselves which will be a long and healthy one. That sense of purpose means demonstrating that positive behaviors lead to positive benefits and negative behaviors lead to destructive outcomes.
If children were already born with this kind of "good sense" child-rearing would be a fantastic experience!
Okay?
Parenting really comes down to a kind of hopeful programming. Education is a kind of benevolent programming. It is all for the ultimate self-benefit of the child.
Letting a five year old play in the street allows them freedom of choice. But, it is hardly responsible parenting.
Allowing Adam and Eve to be alone with a lying demon is equally irresponsible.
Adam had no childhood learning with opportunity to correct errors through experience. He had no mother to teach and comfort him and encourage best behavior. Adam was a ready made "thing" we call somehow "perfect" without any experience in decision making. He was turned loose with programming instructions and only a rational mind with emotional connections attached.
And we wonder why sin entered the world??!!
Terry

Terry, your argument betrays your ignorance of what Christians believe Jesus was.
God did not create Jesus. Jesus is part of God. God took on a human form.
So no, God did not create a man that could not choose sin, God Himself took the form of a man. The man Jesus is both God, and human, at the same time.
Adam was not a God-man. He was a man.
Be honest.
The first major split in Christianity involved this very definition of Jesus own nature and relationship with God.
The Catholic church "won" the arugment. (After flip flopping back and forth.)
It isn't as though this question were settled once and for all time.
Christianity is a plethora of OPINIONS called ORTHODOXY by the denomination of choice.
There is no ONE true church and no ONE true Christianity.
Consequently, there is no ONE true definition of who or what Jesus may or may not be.
Now, that would be honest.
So, whilst I respect the fact you adhere to Nicene Creed, I don't think just because the 4th century churchmen voted it into being it is any more credible than any other opinion.
BurnTheShips

Terry, I have to admit, you've put up a tough nut to crack!
If the will never chooses an action unless the (rational) intellect perceives it as good
And
If in a state of original justice as Adam and Eve enjoyed, the intellect perceives good as good and evil as evil. (unlike us who are concupiscent)
Then
Their intellect, in original justice, would not perceive evil as good.
Therefore
The will in original justice would not have chosen an evil action.
BUT
Adam and Eve were in a state of original justice and chose an evil action.
HOW?
BurnTheShips

So, whilst I respect the fact you adhere to Nicene Creed, I don't think just because the 4th century churchmen voted it into being it is any more credible than any other opinion.
You are using the object of that Creed, a man you do not believe in, to illustrate your point.
Rather you are using an understanding of that object, which is other than what I accept, so you pose a dilemma that does not exist for me. You yourself say that Jesus did not sin, or was not capable of it as part of your argument.
Therefore, you are going to have to acquiesce and accept my using the majority Christian opinion on the matter, AKA Orthodoxy.
Burn
Terry

“Freedom is the power of the will to act or not to act, to act this or that way; whereas it is the characteristic of necessary causes, as animals and inanimate beings, to produce their effects by an intrinsic necessity. Freedom of the will is a consequence of intelligence, and as such the most precious gift of man, an endowment which he can never lose without annihilating his own nature. Man must of necessity be free in every state of life, actual or possible, whether that state be the purely natural (status purœ naturœ), or the state of original justice in paradise (status justitiœ originalis), or the state of fallen nature (status naturœ lapsœ), or the state of regeneration (status naturœ reparatœ). Were man to be deprived of freedom of will, he would necessarily degenerate in his nature and sink to the level of the animal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molinism
Whatever exists has true nature AS THAT THING.
A festering sore cannot heal and STILL EXIST as a festering sore.
This does not mean it is a bad thing for it to heal--now does it?
What plagues man is the festering sore of his own nature AS IT IS, driven only by rational choice in the absence of perfect knowledge.
What I'm trying to discuss with you is that aspect of man's nature which would IMPROVE his condition were it otherwise. (i.e. healing)
A village of cannibals can be taught that there are other things to eat and other behaviors as a society which are BETTER THAN CANNIBALISM. What happens if they stop their cannibalistic behavior and change their society according to improved norms?
THEY STOP BEHAVING AS CANNIBALS.
Does this make them less human?
I certainly hope you see the difference!
BurnTheShips

A festering sore cannot heal and STILL EXIST as a festering sore.
This does not mean it is a bad thing for it to heal--now does it?
What plagues man is the festering sore of his own nature AS IT IS, driven only by rational choice in the absence of perfect knowledge.
Well sure, man is broken as he now is, but this is not because of Free Will, it is because of Original Sin that came from Adam. Therefore man is not now as he was meant to be. Concupiscence.
Man was not a Festering Sore, but is now one. So really, the only object we must consider is the original man, that did not start out as a Festering Sore.
Adam was not fallen, he in a perfect state, aka original justice, and perfectly able to know that good was good and evil was evil, and was not so fallen that his flesh could override his intellect, so why or how did he sin?
Hmmmm.
Jesus was perfect, yet the gospel says Satan tried to tempt him.
Let me think a while.
Thanks
Burn
Terry

Terry, I have to admit, you've put up a tough nut to crack!
If the will never chooses an action unless the (rational) intellect perceives it as good
And
If in a state of original justice as Adam and Eve enjoyed, the intellect perceives good as good and evil as evil. (unlike us who are concupiscent)
Then
Their intellect, in original justice, would not perceive evil as good.
Therefore
The will in original justice would not have chosen an evil action.
BUT
Adam and Eve were in a state of original justice and chose an evil action.
HOW?
I must positively commend you on this chain of reasoning and the ending question: How?
This is the essence!
WE ARE BACK TO THE QUESTION OF JUSTICE!
You can train a hungry dog NOT to eat a slab of beef placed in front of his nose. But, you can't keep him from starving or feeling hunger or salivating. The NATURE of the beast is to eat when it is hungry. But, the nature of the beast is PACK LEADER driven. The leader can over-ride the instinct to eat by the stronger instinct of LEADER.
This is really the issue Christians are dealing with and not seeing it at the same time.
GOD placed man (with all his human nature) in a situation like the hungry dog with the piece of juicy beef in front of his nose. But, God went a step farther, as well. God allowed another party (serpent/demon) to persuade man's very own wife it was a GOOD thing to eat! Then, God allowed the wife (who, might I remind you, was thoroughly deceived!) to be the one to offer the choice to her husband on another level of trust implicit in "one flesh" symbiosis.
The fact that man succumbed to HIS HUMAN NATURE and ate---means man was not a trained DOG!
GOD by making man have this MAN NATURE instead of pack animal DOG NATURE--guaranteed man would succumb just as dropping a brick from your hand guarantees it will fall on your foot!
The "HOW?" comes from the nature of HUMAN NATURE as opposed to the instinctively programmed DOG NATURE of the beast.
God built a nature that was not animal nature--but--he placed it into an animal! Man is the highest animal!
Are you ready for this conclusion?
Hang on...here it comes...
GOD placed within humanity a GOD NATURE instead of the correct animal nature and man acted AS A GOD would act!!
That is what proceeded from making man in His own (God's) image.
Man craved what his GOD NATURE improperly placed in an animal--dissonantly caused him to crave; TO BE LIKE GOD!
What we today call HUMAN NATURE is the placement of GOD nature inside of an animal (man).
The hybridization failed miserably.
Sin.
BurnTheShips

I must positively commend you on this chain of reasoning and the ending question: How?
This is the essence!
WE ARE BACK TO THE QUESTION OF JUSTICE!
You can train a hungry dog NOT to eat a slab of beef placed in front of his nose. But, you can't keep him from starving or feeling hunger or salivating. The NATURE of the beast is to eat when it is hungry. But, the nature of the beast is PACK LEADER driven. The leader can over-ride the instinct to eat by the stronger instinct of LEADER.
This is really the issue Christians are dealing with and not seeing it at the same time.
GOD placed man (with all his human nature) in a situation like the hungry dog with the piece of juicy beef in front of his nose. But, God went a step farther, as well. God allowed another party (serpent/demon) to persuade man's very own wife it was a GOOD thing to eat! Then, God allowed the wife (who, might I remind you, was thoroughly deceived!) to be the one to offer the choice to her husband on another level of trust implicit in "one flesh" symbiosis.
The fact that man succumbed to HIS HUMAN NATURE and ate---means man was not a trained DOG!
GOD by making man have this MAN NATURE instead of pack animal DOG NATURE--guaranteed man would succumb just as dropping a brick from your hand guarantees it will fall on your foot!
The "HOW?" comes from the nature of HUMAN NATURE as opposed to the instinctively programmed DOG NATURE of the beast.
God built a nature that was not animal nature--but--he placed it into an animal! Man is the highest animal!
Are you ready for this conclusion?
Hang on...here it comes...
GOD placed within humanity a GOD NATURE instead of the correct animal nature and man acted AS A GOD would act!!
That is what proceeded from making man in His own (God's) image.
Man craved what his GOD NATURE improperly placed in an animal--dissonantly caused him to crave; TO BE LIKE GOD!
What we today call HUMAN NATURE is the placement of GOD nature inside of an animal (man).
The hybridization failed miserably.
Sin.
That's quite a leap to make.
I'll get back with you.
Burn
Terry

Well sure, man is broken as he now is, but this is not because of Free Will, it is because of Original Sin that came from Adam. Therefore man is not now as he was meant to be.
What caused Orignal Sin if not FREE WILL acted upon?
Terry

Adam was not fallen, he in a perfect state, aka original justice, and perfectly able to know that good was good and evil was evil, and was not so fallen that his flesh could override his intellect, so why or how did he sin?
I'm sorry to have to point out to you that you are confused.
Man craved to possess that which he DID NOT ALREADY possess: knowing what was good and evil. Else, the eating of the fruit would not have been the "knowledge of" good and evil implicit in its designation.
Think again.

DID GOD CREATE THE BEST OF ALL POSSIBLE WORLDS???

Share this