A Question to Christians

**Vuk** · 07-13-2009, 00:04

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

See, now that reads quite differently to your last post. For what it's worth I agree with the above; more or less.

Nah, it is the same thing as my last post. I just emphasized different things in response to your and Ice's different posts.

**Philippus Flavius Homovallumus** · 07-13-2009, 01:02

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

And that's the way it should be, honest and God-centred!

Also does BA stand for Batchelor of Arts? So you've completed Uni?

I forbid you from using the operator "should", there is no should in a deistically deterministic universe because "should" and "is" are both defined by God.

Unless, of course, the universe has a random element which operates without divine direction.

Oh, and yes, I have my BA. Once I finish this Thesis you will have refer to me as "Master"

**Rhyfelwyr** · 07-13-2009, 02:01

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I forbid you from using the operator "should", there is no should in a deistically deterministic universe because "should" and "is" are both defined by God.

Unless, of course, the universe has a random element which operates without divine direction.

Oh, and yes, I have my BA. Once I finish this Thesis you will have refer to me as "Master"

There's nothing wrong with saying "should". Adam had free will before the fall and his actions are representative of the nature of all humanity... being created innocent by God and in communion with Him, humanity as a whole should, from the view of a morally-perfect agent, act according to God's perfect ways. Unless ye be a supralapsarian of course, but my branch of Calvinists never went for that.

Anyway, in my main post you didn't have to take it as being deterministic. On the wider scale looking at humanity in general, God could have brought about all those things I stated through a general 'moral appeal' to individuals to act in a certain manner, which would be no more deterministic or infringe any more on their free will than any other factor which influences the decisions we take would. This would be the position of most Christians I would think, Catholics believe in a dual role between God and the individual when it comes to salvation and making moral choices. You are an Arminian extremist!

Oh and... congratulations on getting your BA, I'm pretty sure you were still studying last time I asked you about it... what's your Thesis on?

**Reenk Roink** · 07-13-2009, 02:10

God's will isn't subject to any value judgments aside from those he might want to put on himself.

Sorry to hear about your friend Ice...

**rotorgun** · 07-13-2009, 02:25

First of all, to Rhyfelwyr, that's about the best way I have heard it put in some time, and much of what you say is how I think on the question. When I last experienced a similar feeling towards El Supremo for taking a close friend of mine, I had to search the scriptures. I was drawn to the story of Lazarus's raising from the dead by Jesus. Initially, when he was brought the news of his death by Lazarus's sisters, we are told that he wept. This is proof that God felt the pain of their loss as much as they did. After he was confronted by one of them as to why he had let Lazarus die, when he could have been there to save him, he remarked something to the effect that it was by this that the power of his father could be made manifest-that he has the ultimate power over life and death.

I don't want to sound trite, or patronizing for I certainly feel your loss with you friend. I only want to ask, does not the rain fall on the just and the unjust at the same time? None of us can escape our fate, but God can use our lives, no matter how short or long they may be, for his good and the good of others.

I pray for the family and friends of this sister christian.

**Philippus Flavius Homovallumus** · 07-13-2009, 02:55

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

There's nothing wrong with saying "should". Adam had free will before the fall and his actions are representative of the nature of all humanity... being created innocent by God and in communion with Him, humanity as a whole should, from the view of a morally-perfect agent, act according to God's perfect ways. Unless ye be a supralapsarian of course, but my branch of Calvinists never went for that.

Anyway, in my main post you didn't have to take it as being deterministic. On the wider scale looking at humanity in general, God could have brought about all those things I stated through a general 'moral appeal' to individuals to act in a certain manner, which would be no more deterministic or infringe any more on their free will than any other factor which influences the decisions we take would. This would be the position of most Christians I would think, Catholics believe in a dual role between God and the individual when it comes to salvation and making moral choices. You are an Arminian extremist!

Oh and... congratulations on getting your BA, I'm pretty sure you were still studying last time I asked you about it... what's your Thesis on?

My Thesis is currently titled, "Humility and Acceptable Heterodoxy in the Middle English Mystics", my Doctoral proposal was accepted, but I'm not getting funding so I will be declining it in a few days.

To the topic at hand:

Previously you said that all Christians glorify God with their lives, and that he selects them for certain purposes. That is deterministic, it's also something I reject. "Moral Appeal" is fine, but your arguements stray far beyond that.

In any case, "Armenianism" is the same as traditional catholic belief (note the small "c"). Armenius is credited with something because Protestants, and particularly those who rejected Calvin, found this embarressing. To whit, the moral persuation of the Holy Spirit is not deterministic, it requires human co-operation.

Calvinism is not co-operative in the same way, it assumes that God selects, for salvation, for specific pruposes, etc. Not only do I think this wrong, I think it is more than a little depressing. In the case of Ice's friend was selected for sudden death without living a full life, having children, grandchildren etc. I see no reason to accept that, especially because it absolves anyone of responsibility for anything. Obviously that's fine in a Calvinistic system, but I like to believe that our lives have more independant meaning.

Not least because it means all our suffering is deliberately ordained by God. Put simply, God killed someone so that Ice would ask these questions.

Nope, that didn't happen.

This wonderful young woman was killed in a tragic accident, hopefully she is in heaven now; or she is awaiting entry to heaven depending on your theology. Trying to find meaning in these things is impossible, that is why we need faith.

**naut** · 07-13-2009, 05:34

Originally Posted by Ice

Why does someone who devotes their lives to their Christian faith while continually sacrificing and helping others deserve to die at a such a young age? I just don't understand god's "logic here". What I'm talking about is an old RA of mine. She was recently killed in a car crash along with her boyfriend. Now this girl honestly was one of the nicest, religious, and helpful people I have ever met. Why on earth would the all power god allow her life to be taken like this? I know things like this happen every day, but this really hits closer to home. I know so many low lives who really don't contribute anything to society. Why not take their life instead of this wonderful girls?

I'd really like to hear your logic on this one and all the other meaningless deaths that happen daily.

Well. This ain't heaven. If everything was fine and dandy here, then concept of a heaven would be redundant.

**Evil_Maniac From Mars** · 07-13-2009, 09:18

See it this way - we, as humans, do not know what death entails, the exact details of what happens. Only God knows this. We cannot claim to know what God's plan for us is, or how we are to be rewarded or punished until it actually happens.