Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Anselm's Doctrine of Substitution
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 4 of 80 (717029)
01-23-2014 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Archer Opteryx
08-08-2008 1:19 AM


God need never lie.
I was bored today, and began browsing old topics at EvC to see what people thought about various things. I stumbled upon Anselm(Archers old topic that went nowhere) and clicked on the link provided.
Anselm writes:
For if God wishes to lie, we must not conclude that it is right to lie, but rather that he is not God. For no will can ever wish to lie, unless truth in it is impaired, nay, unless the will itself be impaired by forsaking truth.
In Anselms opinion, for God to ever lie was illogical.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-08-2008 1:19 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by 1.61803, posted 01-23-2014 5:31 PM Phat has replied
 Message 13 by Jon, posted 01-25-2014 11:49 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 6 of 80 (717080)
01-23-2014 8:38 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by 1.61803
01-23-2014 5:31 PM


Re: God need never lie.
I fail to see how the ability to deceive would complete the spectrum....
Can God create a truth so all encompassing that He could never lie about it? Of course.
what is truth? The way that things actually are. Reality.
What is a lie? A deception. Why would God need to deceive anybody?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by 1.61803, posted 01-23-2014 5:31 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by ringo, posted 01-24-2014 10:50 AM Phat has replied
 Message 17 by 1.61803, posted 01-27-2014 11:44 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 8 of 80 (717118)
01-24-2014 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by ringo
01-24-2014 10:50 AM


Re: God need never lie.
keeping quiet is not lying, however. It is simply knowing when to shut up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by ringo, posted 01-24-2014 10:50 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Theodoric, posted 01-24-2014 1:08 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 12 by ringo, posted 01-25-2014 10:58 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 18 of 80 (717439)
01-27-2014 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by 1.61803
01-27-2014 11:44 AM


Re: God need never lie.
this is a tough one. I shall answer based on my beliefs. There are but two basic spirits. The Spirit of truth, love, and creativity does not lie---has never lied---never will lie, in my belief. This is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of the Holy Trinity. It is quite likely...99%...that S.S. officers would not be flowing in this Spirit.
Then there is the father of lies. There is no truth in him. His purpose is to consolidate and hold power at any cost---including killing Jews.
My first task would be to identify the spirit behind the question. My second task would be saving lives---even by lies. The people in my attic are honorable people and they do in fact flow with the right spirit. So in summation---yes, I would lie to protect them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by 1.61803, posted 01-27-2014 11:44 AM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by 1.61803, posted 01-28-2014 10:46 AM Phat has replied
 Message 20 by ringo, posted 01-28-2014 10:59 AM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 21 of 80 (717520)
01-28-2014 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by ringo
01-28-2014 10:59 AM


Re: God need never lie.
Of course we dont know the exact truth as to how it all happened, but I believe that God created a freewilled Lucifer as a powerful and beautiful angel...not an evil angel directly. Lucifer chose to allow his own ego to blossom and became satan.
I know you will pull up the verse in Isaiah--but I dont believe that God created evil directly. All that was allowed was the possibility of evil...a possibility that was then actualized by Lucifer. Humans inherited the reality of freewill made possible by a dualistic reality.
  • God created the option.
  • Lucifer chose the option and thus created the reality--in the spirit world. 1/3 of Congress voted to go with the satanic platform...2/3 voted to back the reigning president.
    One thing that is commonly done these days is to view good and evil in a relativistic and personal lens.
    I expect satan used the same argument before they booted him and his minions out of the government.
    Of course you have a point if you say that the snake was simply using a political ad to sway the newly created humans to follow his platform. And its also obvious that human nature...even today...campaigns for free will and seeks to place God on equal footing with our own wisdom and choice. You might be right...
    Personally I choose to believe in an absolute positional power over us rather than a relativistic inner power that leaves us responsible for the outcome...but then again try and see the argument from both sides.
    Humans keep trying to bring God to their level of reasoning and guessing how God feels and what God would do.
    God doesnt need to lie. The dress is ugly. You are a sinner. I am one too. We have the awareness of how to do good but we need communion with God. We simply cant do it all ourselves.

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 20 by ringo, posted 01-28-2014 10:59 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 32 by ringo, posted 01-30-2014 11:01 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 22 of 80 (717523)
    01-28-2014 1:41 PM
    Reply to: Message 19 by 1.61803
    01-28-2014 10:46 AM


    The Greater Good
    1.61803 writes:
    If a mother or father are hiding from some enemy troops among a group of fellow villagers. And they will all be put to the sword if found. Is it wrong for the mother to smother her crying baby to save the group?
    What are her intentions? Which spirit gives her the necessary obligation to smother her child---love for one or love for many? Plus...this same argument can be used to justify slaughtering reprobate nations early in the O.T. Better to kill off a band of cancerous people who will pollute the purity of the chosen ones than to love everybody and let the pagans into the sanctuary.
    Now before you all hang me for this outlandish opinion, look at the context and ask yourself these questions:
  • Did the Jews believe themselves more pure than the other nations? Was there evidence to support this claim?
  • When the Bible was written, was it actually God telling them to slay the newborns, or was it their interpretation of what God surely must mean? In other words...was God responsible for their chosen actions? Why or why not?
  • Even today--church "clubs" only allow certain types of members in to the congregation. They would argue that it is improper to smoke bud while worshiping God or that it is idolatrous for human passion to idolize another lover above and beyond worshiping God. etc..etc. My argument is that in both ancient and modern examples...it is the human interpretation of what God commands...not God Himself.

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 19 by 1.61803, posted 01-28-2014 10:46 AM 1.61803 has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 23 by 1.61803, posted 01-28-2014 3:07 PM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 24 of 80 (717544)
    01-28-2014 6:01 PM
    Reply to: Message 23 by 1.61803
    01-28-2014 3:07 PM


    Re: The Greater Good
    Her intentions are to kill her crying child to save many more lives.
    Is the default standard based on number of lives alone? Look at World Wars I, II, and even more recent wars...our side usually kills more of "them" than they do of "us". Is that defacto evil?
    The standard, I think, involves more than numbers...it involves character...if it be possible to rate such a trait.
    Anselm writes:
    God became man, and by his own death, as we believe and affirm, restored life to the world; when he might have done this, by means of some other being, angelic or human, or merely by his will. Not only the learned, but also many unlearned persons interest themselves in this inquiry and seek for its solution.
    Surely Gods son had greater character value than any one (or even many) of us. In fact it could be argued that His lone death had greater sacrificial value than all of ours on the planet put together.
    Wags will often argue that death...for God...was "no big deal nor sacrifice"...but the issue isnt His death having value so much as the issue of sparing our lives having value.
    ringo writes:
    Who created the father of lies? (Who is the grandfather of lies?)
    According to Anselm, all power follows the will. Satan was the originator of willful lies...not God. God only made it a possibility. Satan (or the snake, at any rate) made it an actuality.
    Anselm writes:
    All power follows the will. For, when I say that I can speak or walk, it is understood, if I choose. For, if the will be not implied as acting, there is no power, but only necessity. For, when I say that I can be dragged or bound unwillingly, this is not my power, but necessity and the power of another; since I am able to be dragged or bound in no other sense than this, that another can drag or bind me. So we can say of Christ, that he could lie, so long as we understand, if he chose to do so. And, since he could not lie unwillingly and could not wish to lie, none the less can it be said that he could not lie. So in this way it is both true that he could and could not lie.
    add by edit: (since we will go this way anyway )
    jar,countless times writes:
    But in the story it is the serpent who tells the truth and the God character that lies.
    And jars assumption is based on this:
    jar writes:
    Do they die the very day they eat from the tree? Do they become more like God and get their eyes opened?
    I would argue that humanity has effectively died a spiritual death ever since we learned to think for ourselves. We may have thought that we are more like God the more technologically advanced we get, but it could be argued that we are nowhere near that class...
    which leads to the question: Is the greater good in and of the same classification of the greatest good?
    If the lady refused to smother her baby since in her mind that baby may someday be a great man would she have justifiable cause of risking a dozen lives?
    Edited by Phat, : No reason given.
    Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 23 by 1.61803, posted 01-28-2014 3:07 PM 1.61803 has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 25 by 1.61803, posted 01-29-2014 11:47 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 26 of 80 (717591)
    01-29-2014 12:02 PM
    Reply to: Message 25 by 1.61803
    01-29-2014 11:47 AM


    Re: The Greater Good
    God created evil merely by creating free will
    Lucifer was exposed (as we all are now) only to the possibility of evil. God did not directly make him choose to rebel, any more than God being guilty of murder by virtue of any one of us doing it.
    Unless one were to argue that God forced us to be evil by making it so that we could never be equal to Him.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 25 by 1.61803, posted 01-29-2014 11:47 AM 1.61803 has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 27 by 1.61803, posted 01-29-2014 12:20 PM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 28 of 80 (717595)
    01-29-2014 12:31 PM
    Reply to: Message 27 by 1.61803
    01-29-2014 12:20 PM


    Re: The Greater Good
    Where is our free will in terms of our own creation?
    Well...where is our free will in regards to flying? (apart from our ability to build planes) The popular logic among many non believers is that they would choose free will over obedience any day of the week....they cherish the right to decide over choosing God. Believers, on the other hand, claim that either we believe....and submit...or we die. Perhaps our prayer (just in case) should be to ask God for wisdom and insight on what the actual spiritual reality is.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 27 by 1.61803, posted 01-29-2014 12:20 PM 1.61803 has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 31 by AZPaul3, posted 01-30-2014 7:02 AM Phat has not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 33 of 80 (717687)
    01-30-2014 11:35 AM
    Reply to: Message 32 by ringo
    01-30-2014 11:01 AM


    Re: God need never lie.
    ringo writes:
    I wouldn't say that. I don't see where the snake had any "platform". He was telling the truth. He just didn't mention the consequences, so it was a half-truth. On the other hand, God told an untruth.
    Don't you see the absurdity of this, though? God---by definition---would never need to lie. Having the snake portrayed as the good guy sounds precisely like something a conman would try and sell. And lets think a minute. How do we know that God lied? How do we know that humanity was not supposed to live forever...just as Jesus does? How do we know that we didnt collectively inherit death that day(even if the story is symbolic?)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 32 by ringo, posted 01-30-2014 11:01 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 34 by ringo, posted 01-30-2014 11:44 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 35 of 80 (717722)
    01-30-2014 6:12 PM
    Reply to: Message 34 by ringo
    01-30-2014 11:44 AM


    Re: God need never lie.
    Anselm begged to differ.
    quote:
    Anselm.. Moreover, it is easily proved that man was so made as not to be necessarily subject to death; for, as we have already said, it is inconsistent with God's wisdom and justice to compel man to suffer death without fault, when he made him holy to enjoy eternal blessedness. It therefore follows that had man never sinned he never would have died.
    You people seem to believe that mans divine right was autonomy...in fact you would deny God were He to deny you autonomy. My counterpoint is that autonomy, by definition is evil.
    We were never designed to be gods.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 34 by ringo, posted 01-30-2014 11:44 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 37 by ringo, posted 01-31-2014 10:42 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 38 of 80 (717769)
    01-31-2014 3:40 PM
    Reply to: Message 37 by ringo
    01-31-2014 10:42 AM


    There is no exclusionary option
    Since we are talking faith/belief I will give you my belief.
    What's the difference between autonomy and free will?
    In a spiritual context-- You don't get to decide that you don't need/want a Creator without some consequence.
    The consequence is not that you simply end up in Hell...the consequence is that you will inadvertently support one side or the other. There is no way to sit this one out.
    the online dictionary defines autonomy as "the state of existing or acting separately from others."
    It defines free will as : the ability to choose how to act
    or the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God. My argument would be that even if your choices are not controlled by God, they will be judged by God. Lucifer chose autonomy.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 37 by ringo, posted 01-31-2014 10:42 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 39 by ringo, posted 02-01-2014 10:46 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 40 of 80 (717802)
    02-01-2014 3:27 PM
    Reply to: Message 39 by ringo
    02-01-2014 10:46 AM


    Re: There is no exclusionary option
    One argument is that Lucifer basically pleaded the same case before God that you do. (not to suggest... )
    Why must I listen to you?
    Can't I be an independent spirit apart from your flow?
    Why must I be you? Can't I be like you?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 39 by ringo, posted 02-01-2014 10:46 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 41 by ringo, posted 02-02-2014 1:12 PM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 42 of 80 (717884)
    02-02-2014 4:14 PM
    Reply to: Message 41 by ringo
    02-02-2014 1:12 PM


    Lucifers Defense Attorney
    ringo writes:
    So why don't you play Lucifer's advocate and answer those questions? Pretend, just for a moment, that the apologetics you've been spoon-fed are not the be-all and end-all of knowledge. Pretend, just for a moment, that God isn't the idiot portrayed by the apologists.
    OK...This may take some practice, though.
    GOD: State your case, angel.
    ME OK. Listen, I've enjoyed working here. You taught me a lot. Its just that I want to be loved and worshiped for a change. Why is it that you get all the glory? Its not as if you need it--you have everything you could possibly want! If you truly are fair and unbiased, is it too much to ask that I have my own franchise with my name on it and that people that dont want to listen to a higher authority---like me---be allowed to be their own authority? We want autonomy, Boss. Is that too much to ask?
    GOD Done. With ONE proviso. I have the copyright on love for GOD as well as the name and concept of original Creator.
    ME OK, that was my one gripe, anyway. I wanted to do things my way. I don't seek to be a bad guy. I just want the right to not listen to all the stuff you have spoon-fed me and that my family mindlessly believes. I wanna try things on my own.
    Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 41 by ringo, posted 02-02-2014 1:12 PM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 43 by jar, posted 02-03-2014 8:53 AM Phat has replied
     Message 44 by ringo, posted 02-03-2014 10:45 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    Message 45 of 80 (717968)
    02-03-2014 12:21 PM
    Reply to: Message 44 by ringo
    02-03-2014 10:45 AM


    Re: Lucifers Defense Attorney
    Lets see what Anselm thought:
    quote:
    Anselm.. If man or angel always rendered to God his due, he would never sin.
    Boso . I cannot deny that.
    Anselm.. Therefore to sin is nothing else than not to render to God his due.
    Boso. What is the debt which we owe to God?
    Anselm.. Every wish of a rational creature should be subject to the will of God.
    Boso. Nothing is more true.
    I can see where Anselm promoted the doctrine of original sin, and of Christs substitution for our deserved death...but it appears that Anselm also emphasized that Christ--as human---did this as an act of his own will.
    Anselm writes:
    when any creature wishes to do a thing that is left entirely at his own disposal, we say that he ought to do it, for what he wishes to be ought to be. So our Lord Jesus, when he wished, as we have said, to suffer death, ought to have done precisely what he did; because he ought to be what he wished, and was not bound to do anything as a debt. As he is both God and man, in connection with his human nature, which made him a man, he must also have received from the Divine nature that control over himself which freed him from all obligation, except to do as he chose.
    ringo writes:
    See what I mean about making God look like an idiot? Why would He be so petty?
    Are you suggesting that God leaves the idea of worship and obligation entirely at our choice and will? That even if we chose to become atheists and chose to look to no other higher source than ourselves that He would honor it? This is getting scary...and interesting.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 44 by ringo, posted 02-03-2014 10:45 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 48 by ringo, posted 02-04-2014 10:44 AM Phat has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024