PabloSerna said:

---

Not trying to convert you or anything, just trying to understand that's all. Thanks for sharing your insight.

For me, one of my favorite quotes that Jesus says to his apostles, John 15:15

"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you."

The "friends" part is what gets me. Maybe it was just my path, but I feel more like I have this "friendship" with Jesus in which I am constantly amazed at how God speaks to me through people and life. This is where I have seen God the most evident - in the people and places God has created.

---

Are you referring to the improbable synchronicities that pop up from time to time as a result of your faith? Gods timing is perfect, isn't it? If I try and crunch the numbers for everything that had to line up for these synchronicities in my life they become astronomical.

jonb02 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Not trying to convert you or anything, just trying to understand that's all. Thanks for sharing your insight.

For me, one of my favorite quotes that Jesus says to his apostles, John 15:15

"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you."

The "friends" part is what gets me. Maybe it was just my path, but I feel more like I have this "friendship" with Jesus in which I am constantly amazed at how God speaks to me through people and life. This is where I have seen God the most evident - in the people and places God has created.

---

Are you referring to the improbable synchronicities that pop up from time to time as a result of your faith? Gods timing is perfect, isn't it? If I try and crunch the numbers for everything that had to line up for these synchronicities in my life they become astronomical.

---

Nm.

AGC said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Not trying to convert you or anything, just trying to understand that's all. Thanks for sharing your insight.

For me, one of my favorite quotes that Jesus says to his apostles, John 15:15

"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you."

The "friends" part is what gets me. Maybe it was just my path, but I feel more like I have this "friendship" with Jesus in which I am constantly amazed at how God speaks to me through people and life. This is where I have seen God the most evident - in the people and places God has created.

---

Are you referring to the improbable synchronicities that pop up from time to time as a result of your faith? Gods timing is perfect, isn't it? If I try and crunch the numbers for everything that had to line up for these synchronicities in my life they become astronomical.

---

Interesting. How do you know you're using the correct numbers?

---

I don't and I'm not a mathematician but when I stop and think to myself "in order for this to have happened all of these other things had to happen first" the odds appear to me to be very very low of these things happening by mere chance.

Except anything will look that way given enough time and enough events.

jonb02 said:

---

AGC said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Not trying to convert you or anything, just trying to understand that's all. Thanks for sharing your insight.

For me, one of my favorite quotes that Jesus says to his apostles, John 15:15

"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you."

The "friends" part is what gets me. Maybe it was just my path, but I feel more like I have this "friendship" with Jesus in which I am constantly amazed at how God speaks to me through people and life. This is where I have seen God the most evident - in the people and places God has created.

---

Are you referring to the improbable synchronicities that pop up from time to time as a result of your faith? Gods timing is perfect, isn't it? If I try and crunch the numbers for everything that had to line up for these synchronicities in my life they become astronomical.

---

Interesting. How do you know you're using the correct numbers?

---

I don't and I'm not a mathematician but when I stop and think to myself "in order for this to have happened all of these other things had to happen first" the odds appear to me to be very very low of these things happening by mere chance.

---

Nm.

AGC said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

AGC said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Not trying to convert you or anything, just trying to understand that's all. Thanks for sharing your insight.

For me, one of my favorite quotes that Jesus says to his apostles, John 15:15

"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you."

The "friends" part is what gets me. Maybe it was just my path, but I feel more like I have this "friendship" with Jesus in which I am constantly amazed at how God speaks to me through people and life. This is where I have seen God the most evident - in the people and places God has created.

---

Are you referring to the improbable synchronicities that pop up from time to time as a result of your faith? Gods timing is perfect, isn't it? If I try and crunch the numbers for everything that had to line up for these synchronicities in my life they become astronomical.

---

Interesting. How do you know you're using the correct numbers?

---

I don't and I'm not a mathematician but when I stop and think to myself "in order for this to have happened all of these other things had to happen first" the odds appear to me to be very very low of these things happening by mere chance.

---

So if you assume an arbitrary chain of events with arbitrary probabilities you get the outcome you're looking for?

---

It isn't an arbitrary chain of events if it starts with intent and ends with an unintended outcome.

jonb02 said:

---

AGC said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

AGC said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Not trying to convert you or anything, just trying to understand that's all. Thanks for sharing your insight.

For me, one of my favorite quotes that Jesus says to his apostles, John 15:15

"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you."

The "friends" part is what gets me. Maybe it was just my path, but I feel more like I have this "friendship" with Jesus in which I am constantly amazed at how God speaks to me through people and life. This is where I have seen God the most evident - in the people and places God has created.

---

Are you referring to the improbable synchronicities that pop up from time to time as a result of your faith? Gods timing is perfect, isn't it? If I try and crunch the numbers for everything that had to line up for these synchronicities in my life they become astronomical.

---

Interesting. How do you know you're using the correct numbers?

---

I don't and I'm not a mathematician but when I stop and think to myself "in order for this to have happened all of these other things had to happen first" the odds appear to me to be very very low of these things happening by mere chance.

---

So if you assume an arbitrary chain of events with arbitrary probabilities you get the outcome you're looking for?

---

It isn't an arbitrary chain of events if it starts with intent and ends with an unintended outcome.

---

Nm.

What makes them improbable is the likelihood of them happening without the initial "act of faith", if you will.

God helps those who ask for it.

jonb02 said:

---

What makes them improbable is the likelihood of them happening without the initial "act of faith", if you will.

God helps those who ask for it.

---

Nm.

Sapper Redux said:

---

Quote:

---

For a thing to exist it must participate in a pattern.

---

No, for humans to recognize something we have to place it into a pattern. That's completely different from existence. As for your "if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around," statement, we are now aware of any number of things that prior humans cannot have observed or understood. That prior humans were unaware of them does not mean the things did not exist. Making all of reality revolve around human perception is a choice, I suppose, but it's not a particularly good choice.

---

The divine mind was first and nothing was created before this. Existence is a creation. This is the philosophical concept that you and every other materialist can't get past just because a human made an idea that there are distinctions. We attempted to abstract ourselves when that was never actually the case. You only believe this idea because of a human. You haven't escaped anything or proved anything.

AGC said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

What makes them improbable is the likelihood of them happening without the initial "act of faith", if you will.

God helps those who ask for it.

---

Right so how do you calculate those likelihoods? Can you show your work?

---

Man I'm not trying to convert you, there is no need for sarcasm here. You are free to do you. I know how Jesus changed my life when I asked Him for help. A lot of beautiful things happened outside of my control once I asked Him to step into my life. That's enough for me at the end of the day.

jonb02 said:

---

AGC said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

What makes them improbable is the likelihood of them happening without the initial "act of faith", if you will.

God helps those who ask for it.

---

Right so how do you calculate those likelihoods? Can you show your work?

---

Man I'm not trying to convert you, there is no need for sarcasm here. You are free to do you. I know how Jesus changed my life when I asked Him for help. A lot of beautiful things happened outside of my control once I asked Him to step into my life. That's enough for me at the end of the day.

---

I read your comment differently, my apologies. I'll edit the posts

Orthodox Texan said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Quote:

---

For a thing to exist it must participate in a pattern.

---

No, for humans to recognize something we have to place it into a pattern. That's completely different from existence. As for your "if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around," statement, we are now aware of any number of things that prior humans cannot have observed or understood. That prior humans were unaware of them does not mean the things did not exist. Making all of reality revolve around human perception is a choice, I suppose, but it's not a particularly good choice.

---

The divine mind was first and nothing was created before this. Existence is a creation. This is the philosophical concept that you and every other materialist can't get past just because a human made an idea that there are distinctions. We attempted to abstract ourselves when that was never actually the case. You only believe this idea because of a human. You haven't escaped anything or proved anything.

---

That's a lot of words to say nothing.

Sapper Redux said:

---

Orthodox Texan said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Quote:

---

For a thing to exist it must participate in a pattern.

---

No, for humans to recognize something we have to place it into a pattern. That's completely different from existence. As for your "if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around," statement, we are now aware of any number of things that prior humans cannot have observed or understood. That prior humans were unaware of them does not mean the things did not exist. Making all of reality revolve around human perception is a choice, I suppose, but it's not a particularly good choice.

---

The divine mind was first and nothing was created before this. Existence is a creation. This is the philosophical concept that you and every other materialist can't get past just because a human made an idea that there are distinctions. We attempted to abstract ourselves when that was never actually the case. You only believe this idea because of a human. You haven't escaped anything or proved anything.

---

That's a lot of words to say nothing.

---

and you are once again failing to understand philosophy at basic levels.

Orthodox Texan said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Orthodox Texan said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Quote:

---

For a thing to exist it must participate in a pattern.

---

No, for humans to recognize something we have to place it into a pattern. That's completely different from existence. As for your "if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around," statement, we are now aware of any number of things that prior humans cannot have observed or understood. That prior humans were unaware of them does not mean the things did not exist. Making all of reality revolve around human perception is a choice, I suppose, but it's not a particularly good choice.

---

The divine mind was first and nothing was created before this. Existence is a creation. This is the philosophical concept that you and every other materialist can't get past just because a human made an idea that there are distinctions. We attempted to abstract ourselves when that was never actually the case. You only believe this idea because of a human. You haven't escaped anything or proved anything.

---

That's a lot of words to say nothing.

---

and you are once again failing to understand philosophy at basic levels.

---

Dude, you're pounding away at a door but no one's home.

Because He birthed His Son to tell us what the Father was saying to us through Him. And His Son was Him with skin on. Everything Jesus said was God speaking to us. Jesus was God. God the Holy Spirit speaks to us too.

I'm not sure if anyone already mentioned, but God sent angels as messengers to people. (ex, God sent an angel to Joseph when Mary was pregnant, God sent angels to Sodom and Gomorrah)

God spoke to prophets. He told Jonah to go to Ninevah.

There's countless examples.

Everything Jesus said was God talking. It'd be a disservice not to count what he said.

It's a shame this discussion deviated so much from the OP. The problem of divine hiddenness is probably the only real objection to the faith I have no good answer for. At least not yet, but I do pray I'll get to one some day.

I think it's a completely valid concern for an atheist or agnostic to say, "i was created without my consent, placed with parents I didn't choose, in a time I didn't choose, in a country I didn't choose and I'm supposed to figure out what faith is correct and if I choose incorrectly, I get to burn in hell forever". Yes, God is the all powerful creator and He can do what He wants, but it seems fair enough (by human standards) that He could come visit with a doubter for half an hour and give some reassurances. Especially if God loves each of his creations individually. Its all great and good that Moses, Abraham and some other old dudes got to talk to God. Why won't He do that for everyone else? It's fair to say there seems to be inconsistencies, and this is probably why Calvinism exists. He appears to be totally fine with some people going to hell.

The best I've come up with at this point is that God revealing Himself to these doubters wouldn't do any good. Most of the atheists/agnostics I've listened to wouldn't follow God's laws if He showed up tomorrow anyway. It seems like the few I've had contact with or listened to have a disagreement with the way God set things up and end up losing faith in His existence, rather than choosing to acknowledge His reality and then reject His commands. But if He removed all doubt of His existence, would they reject Him like Lucifer? would they choose to get with His program? Doubters on this board, what do you think?

Only other thing I can come up with is "the privileged way" that bishop Barron talks about. It's hard for that not to devolve into at least some degree of relativism, but at least it gives everyone a shot at Heaven based on their set of individual circumstances.

If the god of the universe actually showed up I'd be pretty interested in what he had to say.

Fair enough. Let me be more specific about the "reject" part. In America, most Christians and non-Christians agree with a lot of basics: love one another, be generous, don't beat your wife and kids, don't steal from others, etc. I think the vast majority of Americans are cool here, and our disagreement is more of what that looks like rather than if it virtuous or not. What We really tend to disagree on a select few issues. If God showed up and told you the following:

Homosexuality is wrong
Transgenderism is wrong
Abortion is murder
Fornication/adultery is bad
Contraception is wrong
Patriarchy/male headship is good
Drunkenness is bad
Gluttony is bad
Daily prayer to Me is necessary for spiritual growth
I am the final arbiter of all that is good and evil, etc

Do you think you'd hop on board with that or tell Him to get lost? Obviously we can never know what we'd do in a hypothetical, but it seems to me, from the few atheists/agnostics I've interacted with, the answer is no and that they'd continue to live their life the way they want. What do you think?

I think the premise of the the OPs question is loaded. It's like asking someone, "Have you stop beating your wife yet?" Try answering that with a "yes" or "no."

So this whole idea that God "did" this (create people he can't talk to) is the fallacy. Not only does God continue to talk to his creation everyday and every minute through a very real and physical presence, but he does this in a way that ensures our freewill.

I think that because of the way God chose to reveal himself, first through a chosen people, then incarnate, then through a group of believers, and now through a church - is what many people have an issue with.

But if you think about - it is divine!

The Banned said:

---

Fair enough. Let me be more specific about the "reject" part. In America, most Christians and non-Christians agree with a lot of basics: love one another, be generous, don't beat your wife and kids, don't steal from others, etc. I think the vast majority of Americans are cool here, and our disagreement is more of what that looks like rather than if it virtuous or not. What We really tend to disagree on a select few issues. If God showed up and told you the following:

Homosexuality is wrong
Transgenderism is wrong
Abortion is murder
Fornication/adultery is bad
Contraception is wrong
Patriarchy/male headship is good
Drunkenness is bad
Gluttony is bad
Daily prayer to Me is necessary for spiritual growth
I am the final arbiter of all that is good and evil, etc

Do you think you'd hop on board with that or tell Him to get lost? Obviously we can never know what we'd do in a hypothetical, but it seems to me, from the few atheists/agnostics I've interacted with, the answer is no and that they'd continue to live their life the way they want. What do you think?

---

.

I think it might depend on the reasoning behind why those things are right / wrong. I'm open. But I'm uneasy about a God that says those things are right/wrong 'because I say so'. If a God exists, it's not a given that It is benevolent or even decent. God could exist and It could be a total monster. If that's the case,s I kinda hope I have the courage to stand against.

You should ask yourself these same questions. How would you react if God shows up and is not the Christian God? Or is the Christian God and precedes to explain how Christians have butchered His commandments and proceeds to lay out a feminist, proLGBTQ, socialist agenda? Would you call to your knees and reform your ways or would you tell God to get lost?

Assume you have the wrong God . . . How comfortable are you with the idea of a 'Might Makes Right' authoritative God?

I don't think it would bother me too much. Might shock me, sure, as I believe natural law reveals much of this to us. But if God showed up and said "NOPE! you're supposed to do it this way", I could adjust. And I don't think it's might makes right either. It's simply what IS right. You would never go to the creator of monopoly and say she did it wrong. You might disagree with some rules and think it could be done better. You're even free to play the game the way you want. Doesn't change the fact that you're playing it wrong. She won't beat you into submission but you'll lose the game based on the official rules.

That's the approach God takes with us. We send ourselves to hell by not following Him and His rules. And they aren't the rules He arbitrarily created. He IS the rules because he IS existence. Same as I said on the morality thread. He introduces Himself and Jesus repeats it: "I AM"

Lastly, I guess God could be a monster God that delights in pain and misery. That would give me great pause. I have plenty of reason to believe that God is not like that at all, so it's a weirder thought experiment.

I forgot to mention that time God spoke directly to the children of Israel because they were about to stone Moses, and Joshua! (Numbers 14)

:0

Or the time God wrote a message for Belshazzar on the wall (Daniel 4)

It bears repeating that God has spoken to his creation in the flesh some 2000 years ago. Here's a quote,

"I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you."

He went on to promise an advocate, a spiritual messenger, to guide us through all things regarding the faith which he established when he commissioned the 12 apostles.

So this notion that God created people he can't talk to is a false assumption.

It would seem that the OP is not questioning the existence of God, but that God does not communicate through talking, I assume verbal action. I would expand this definition of "talking" to include inaudible meditation. Music, art, architecture, are also forms of expression in which God speaks without uttering a word, as Jesus would say, "He who has ears, let him hear"

it would seem that Jesus understood the doubting nature of man and instead of erecting a physical temple, building complex - said, "tear it down and I will raise it up in 3 days" for which he was charged with blasphemy. Many understood that in the literal sense, the Temple of Jerusalem, but Jesus was speaking about the body.

"If a God exists, it's not a given that It is benevolent or even decent. God could exist and It could be a total monster. If that's the case,s I kinda hope I have the courage to stand against."

+++

This question is really about the nature of good and evil. Much has been written, I follow Aquinas in his explanation that evil is essentially a "privation" of goodness. Much like shadow is to light or cold is the heat - evil is basically a lack of goodness. Understood in this framework, Aquinas builds the case that God is the source and summit of all goodness.

Aquinas explains that the privations we see in nature; animals killing other animals, hurricanes, and other natural process, grow, die, and decay - as part of a necessary feature of the good of the whole universe. This he calls the evil of nature.

When it comes to man, Aquinas breaks down the "evil" experienced into two types, Poena (pain/penalty/punishment) and Culpa (fault/guilt).

For example:

Billy, freely steals a horse from a neighbor. This is bad for the neighbor and for Billy. Billy has committed an sin that can lead to his destruction. This is what Aquinas calls the "evil of fault" or of guilt, and is a kind of moral suicide. When the Sheriff arrests Billy and places him in jail, Billy experiences another evil, his loss of freedom. This second evil is not the same as the first, because it is in response to the first evil he committed. Aquinas calls this an "evil of penalty" or punishment.

Through Billy's freewill, he chose to steal, in doing so he is choosing to become a bad person. By contrast, Billy's punishment, while an evil for him in one sense is good and just. It can even help Billy become good. Especially if Billy is contrite and resolves himself to not steal again.

From this Aquinas concludes that God never wills the evil of sin or of fault. Sin is man's fault. We choose some partial good, contrary to the order of right reason not caring about the damage that will result. God permits us to do this, but God in no way is its cause.

However, Aquinas writes, God does will the punishment that follows from this moral evil both in order to restore the right ordering of justice and also to correct the wrongdoer.

A deeper question is Why does God permit the suffering of the innocent? Human suffering, bodily death, undergoing persecution and injustice are very real and terrible evils, and not part of God's original plan for us. Those evils entered the world through the original sin of our first parents. Like a baby born to a heroine addict, it inherits the terrible consequences of the mother's addition. These are the evils of pain and penalty. They can also be the occasion for great moral nobility and goodness like a person offering up their suffering in the midst of illness or when someone preserves in the truth and forgives an unjust persecutor. This gives real meaning and hope to suffering. For me, this was the clincher - a real truth that the world rejects.

But back to your original question about the nature of God (good or evil) - It comes down to why does God permit sin? Aquinas dismisses the argument that because God has given us freewill, it is therefore impossible for God to prevent evil. This is because Aquinas writes that God is the origin of our freedom and implants in us the desire for good. God can act within our will, moving it toward good. But then if God can move our will, why does he not do so every time? Aquinas offers a glimpse into the wisdom of God by stating that we can be sure that God only permits evil for the sake of some better and higher good, including not only our individual good, but the good of the whole of creation. This is hard to accept because we cannot readily see this at the moment or understand how this sin might lead to good. However, God by definition is infinitely powerful and infinitely good. Finally Aquinas says that God allows the defect of sin so that he can manifest his goodness in an even greater way as our Savior.

This is what Jesus did for us on the cross. A terrible evil that has redeemed the world.

(sorry for the long post)

The Banned said:

---

I don't think it would bother me too much. Might shock me, sure, as I believe natural law reveals much of this to us. But if God showed up and said "NOPE! you're supposed to do it this way", I could adjust. And I don't think it's might makes right either. It's simply what IS right. You would never go to the creator of monopoly and say she did it wrong. You might disagree with some rules and think it could be done better. You're even free to play the game the way you want. Doesn't change the fact that you're playing it wrong. She won't beat you into submission but you'll lose the game based on the official rules.

That's the approach God takes with us. We send ourselves to hell by not following Him and His rules. And they aren't the rules He arbitrarily created. He IS the rules because he IS existence. Same as I said on the morality thread. He introduces Himself and Jesus repeats it: "I AM"

Lastly, I guess God could be a monster God that delights in pain and misery. That would give me great pause. I have plenty of reason to believe that God is not like that at all, so it's a weirder thought experiment.

---

Is it an important distinction between God and the Monopoly analogy that I can choose not to play Monopoly? I did not choose to be born. But I was, and as a result, I am subject to immovable, indisputable, and absolute rules whether I like them or not. What is the point of free will and individualism in this scenario? We are created, against our wills and it is commanded we act in a certain manner or be punished. Regardless of whether you agree with what you are being commanded to do, this sounds more like slavery.

Now, a scenario where those not saved simply face annihilation, then perhaps we do have free will. Just as I did not choose to be created, I can choose to go back to an effectively un-created state of being. But, a scenario with any version of Hell or punishment seems truly sinister to me.

How can it be that something simply IS right? Unless God is subject to the limitations of some higher power mandating what is right, then God is the origin of 'right'. And He gets to decide what is right, because He made it and he has all of the might. If you or I are not permitted to contribute to the conversation of what is right, then we have no might in the decision. God determines what is right and he gets to do so because he holds ALL of the power.

How does the God you believe in value you as an individual? Do we have our own value or do we simply exist to bolster God's value like the lady in waiting in Coming To America? If God tells you to bark like a dog and hop on one foot, are we to simply follow because we have no value outside of obedience?

Quote:

---

Is it an important distinction between God and the Monopoly analogy that I can choose not to play Monopoly? I did not choose to be born. But I was, and as a result, I am subject to immovable, indisputable, and absolute rules whether I like them or not. What is the point of free will and individualism in this scenario? We are created, against our wills and it is commanded we act in a certain manner or be punished. Regardless of whether you agree with what you are being commanded to do, this sounds more like slavery.

---

Do you similarly accuse your parents of enslaving you to death? This is kind of a strange approach.

That being said, the formula of "act in a certain manner or be punished" is nowhere in the scriptures. This is a much later gloss that Western Christendom brought. It's not a correct understanding and it is truly a foreign concept.

Quote:

---

Now, a scenario where those not saved simply face annihilation, then perhaps we do have free will. Just as I did not choose to be created, I can choose to go back to an effectively un-created state of being.

---

I think you're using a strained definition of will. A limit of possibility is not a limit of will. If freedom of will requires freedom to act in all ways, at all times, with complete sovereignty over reality then the only truly free being would be a Creator.

Quote:

---

But, a scenario with any version of Hell or punishment seems truly sinister to me.

---

Do you similarly fret that jumping off of a sufficiently high building will injure or kill you? Or that smoking cigarettes for your whole life will have a significant negative effect on your health? Do these certain outcomes restrain your will, and are they 'sinister'?

Quote:

---

How does the God you believe in value you as an individual? Do we have our own value or do we simply exist to bolster God's value...?

---

This is kind of backwards. We don't bolster God's value, it isn't possible. He doesn't need us, derives no benefit from our existence... He isn't mutable, He can't be improved.

The promise of the scriptures isn't like eternal cloud riding happiness but nothing less than becoming God. The Christian faith teaches that all humans have only one end, one purpose or telos which is God Himself. This is an eternal growing that begins in this life and proceeds for all eternity as the distance between Creator and created is infinite. Every single person ever born was made in the image of God and has one singular destiny which is to become God. There is no other end. Living well, if you call it that, is to realize this nature. Living poorly is to deny it. Diminishing the human nature doesn't make us inhuman, but only realizing our nature fulfills our purpose as creatures. Man is the creature who has received the order to become God, as St Basil the Great said.

This is in the scriptures: growing into the fullness of the stature of Christ, God being all in all, partaking of the divine nature, and so on.

St Maximos goes on to say that humans have a fixed and unchangeable natural disposition for this activity. I understand this as something like, you have the capacity to choose something other than God, but this does not change our nature which is defined or framed by this telos.

I can think of no higher purpose or calling or value imaginable.

//////

Edit to add. The older / classical understanding of will is related to possibility in a way. When they talked about wills it was more along the line of freedom to become. So an acorn wills to be an oak tree, it has telos in sight as well. A free will means nothing restrains this becoming. Often, then, when church fathers spoke of the freedom of the will they are affirming that there is nothing that prevents a human from achieving their telos. With this in sight we can understand why "free will" is a central tenet of the Christian faith.

"Every single person ever born was made in the image of God and has one singular destiny which is to become God."

+++

I'm not familiar with Orthodox, but is this an the common understanding? I know we share the same creed, and the part about, "true God from true God" only ever applied to Jesus.

Our Catechism (CCC 1025) teaches that we will be with Christ, but will retain our being, finding our true self in the beatific vision that is heaven. So we do not become God, but are one with God.

The fathers teach we become by grace what God is by nature. We don't lose ourselves but become actualized in Theosis, and this is an infinite progression because we are creatures. Your catechism affirms this (CCC 460).

As St Athanasius said - "For He was made man that we might be made God."

St Maximos says it is to become "everything that God is, without however identity in essence" and further "hope to deification of human nature is provided by the incarnation of God, which makes man god to the same degree as God himself became man…. For it is clear that He who became man without sin will divinize human nature without changing it into the divine nature, and will raise it up for his own sake to the same degree as He lowered himself for man's sake."

St Irenaeus wrote "the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through his transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself."

Lossky summarizes the fathers this way : ""The goal of orthodox spirituality, the blessedness of the Kingdom of Heaven, is not the vision of the essence, but above all, a participation in the divine life of the Holy Trinity; the deified state of the co-heirs of the divine nature, gods created after the uncreated God, possessing by grace all that the Holy Trinity possesses by nature."

I am seeing that this is an area that we have somewhat different language to express our oneness with God in heaven. Good info. I'd have to dig into this more on the RCC side before responding.

Quote:

---

Do you similarly accuse your parents of enslaving you to death? This is kind of a strange approach.

That being said, the formula of "act in a certain manner or be punished" is nowhere in the scriptures. This is a much later gloss that Western Christendom brought. It's not a correct understanding and it is truly a foreign concept.

---

No. My parents did not lay down immovable, indisputable, and absolute rules that I would be forced to conform to for eternity. That would be strange.

I'm not sure what your specific objection is to 'act in a certain manner or be punished' is. I am in no position to declare what is the correct or incorrect understanding of the scriptures. Have there not been / Are there not currently billions of Christians that believe in some form of punishment after death for 'sinners'? Even if it is a 'new' concept within Christianity, it is still what the majority of Christians believe in today. Your post above was a reply to me replying to 'The Banned' who clearly does believe in Hell. If he's wrong, feel free to take him up on that point.

Quote:

---

I think you're using a strained definition of will. A limit of possibility is not a limit of will. If freedom of will requires freedom to act in all ways, at all times, with complete sovereignty over reality then the only truly free being would be a Creator.

---

I don't take any exception to your point. But, I think its worth noting there could be a "spectrum of free will" where freedom to act in all ways at all times is at one end of the spectrum and a version of free will where someone one has extremely few freedoms of action at their disposal is at the other end.

Quote:

---

Do you similarly fret that jumping off of a sufficiently high building will injure or kill you? Or that smoking cigarettes for your whole life will have a significant negative effect on your health? Do these certain outcomes restrain your will, and are they 'sinister'?

---

When I jump off a high building, does gravity make a conscience judgement on my specific action to send me hurtling toward the ground? Gravity is indiscriminate.

I don't have any general objection to the prospect of consequences for my actions. But, when it comes to Heaven and Hell, I don't understand the consequences and what actions lead to those consequences. Can tell me exactly what actions will lead me to Heaven and what actions will lead me to Hell? Then, can you explain to me what Heaven will be like and what Hell will be like? I can ask that question to a lot of Christians and get a lot of answers. I can ask that question to a lot of humans and get even more answers.

Imagine you die and meet the Aztec sun god at the gates of Heaven. How would you react if the sun god told you that you would be judged on some vastly different criteria than you expect?

What I object to is a God that would apply consequences for actions performed without knowledge or understanding of what those consequences would be. I actually think you agree with this objection.

Quote:

---

The promise of the scriptures isn't like eternal cloud riding happiness but nothing less than becoming God. The Christian faith teaches that all humans have only one end, one purpose or telos which is God Himself. This is an eternal growing that begins in this life and proceeds for all eternity as the distance between Creator and created is infinite. Every single person ever born was made in the image of God and has one singular destiny which is to become God. There is no other end. Living well, if you call it that, is to realize this nature. Living poorly is to deny it. Diminishing the human nature doesn't make us inhuman, but only realizing our nature fulfills our purpose as creatures. Man is the creature who has received the order to become God, as St Basil the Great said.

Edit to add. The older / classical understanding of will is related to possibility in a way. When they talked about wills it was more along the line of freedom to become. So an acorn wills to be an oak tree, it has telos in sight as well. A free will means nothing restrains this becoming. Often, then, when church fathers spoke of the freedom of the will they are affirming that there is nothing that prevents a human from achieving their telos. With this in sight we can understand why "free will" is a central tenet of the Christian faith.

---

What is it like to become God? I don't think I've ever become God before.

Jokes aside, I do I appreciate you writing out this response. I think your edit is well stated explanation of how you see free will working.