24-Dec-18 World View -- Generational Dynamics analysis of the troop withdrawal from Syria

[Tom Mazanec]

God gave man free will, because He wants to be freely loved. A robot cannot freely love. If man chooses to disobey God, that is on man.

[FishbellykanakaDude]

God gave man free will, because He wants to be freely loved. A robot cannot freely love. If man chooses to disobey God, that is on man.

In my theology (I always have to preface this stuff, for obvious reasons),.. All persons have always had "free will", and didn't receive it from anywhere, as it is what makes persons PERSONS.

In other words, no person ever existed without free will.

One either believes that free will exists, or one doesn't.

The "cosmic" question is not, "Why is there free will?", but rather, "Why is there evil?"

God gives us what we need, which is the definition of Love.

..do we give God what he needs?

"What the heck does God need, that we can give him?"

The stone rolling down the hill gives God what he needs. The stone knows it's job.

"The game", within this classroom, is our job.

Do we do our job with intention, or not.

..'though, invariably, we DO do our job, because even if intentionally wrongly done, all actions move us toward inevitable beauty.

[Tom Mazanec]

.'though, invariably, we DO do our job, because even if intentionally wrongly done, all actions move us toward inevitable beauty.

So if I understand you, FishbellykanakaDude, evil only occurs if a greater good can be made of it? That is another Christian belief as well.

[FishbellykanakaDude]

...

I don't think that your theology is as you say or, if it is, then your
theology contains some inconsistencies.

If an omnipotent omniscient God created the universe and everything in
it, and then unintended consequences occur, then the unintended
consequences are his fault.

That, of course, is the age old question of "The Nature of Good and Evil" in a nutshell.

The tricky bit is understanding what the words "omnipotent" and "omniscient" means.

..as well as "unintended", of course. And possibly "fault", too.

The simple way of describing the problem with those words (meanings) is the flippant statement: "Them things don't mean what you THINK they mean, Bunky..!!!"

This goes to the meanings of the words "omnipotent" and "omniscient".

I like to add to those Godly attributes "Omnibenevolent".

Being "all powerful" and "all knowing" can only be attributed to a single entity, as those attributes obviate any "opposition". God is singular (in his triplicity! <chuckle!>).

Omnipotence includes the power to allow error (evil) to exist if it is eventually corrected, which is the constraint of omnibenevolence (all goodness).

Omnipotence does not mean God is capable of doing anything. It means he is capable of doing whatever he wants. Does he want to create a rock even he can't move? No.

Omniscience does mean that he is capable of knowing everything, and as such knows the goal toward which the universe is progressing.

(( Major edit in the next sentence: I've inserted a big red "NOT". I had left that out, in error. ))

..but that knowledge does NOT imply control over the free will actions of the persons within the universe. He simply "knows" what their choices will be.

The universe has been "arranged" to "work" to it's "endpoint", which all the free will choices (as well as the more "mechanical" actions) will be found to have contributed to the achievement.

There are no unintended consequences within the creation of the universe.

Evil does exist, but is only transitory.

..and each person can choose to believe that or not.

[John]

Actually, it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

[FishbellykanakaDude]

Actually, it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

That IS true...!! <chuckle!>

Aloha nui you delightfully crazy weasel, you..!!