Evidence for God from Science

RickD wrote:

Jac3510 wrote:

RickD wrote:You really have to lay off the cheap beer!

Absolutely. Cheap whiskey's a way better choice.

Sorry. It brings back too many bad memories.

Wait? You have memories of cheap whiskey?

Obviously, your doing it wrong . . .

A few hangovers - THOSE are what I clearly remember. I was never a hard-stuff guy. Few run-ins as a kid with Jack and Vodka showed me (thankfully) I'd never be a REAL man. Today, a hangover would likely kill me. And dang near did, back in the day.

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:Paul, that was question for Kenny. I was not asking for myself.

Kenny, Paul replied you, right?

Do you share Pauls views of the New Earth for those who don't make it to Heaven?

Ken

As Jac said, that is not what Paul said.

Look also here. It is very short. I would only copy paste that for you.
http://www.gotquestions.org/new-heavens-earth.html
So, believers will go to "heaven" that is in fact new earth and new heaven=sky.

1over137 wrote:

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:Paul, that was question for Kenny. I was not asking for myself.

Kenny, Paul replied you, right?

Do you share Pauls views of the New Earth for those who don't make it to Heaven?

Ken

As Jac said, that is not what Paul said.

Look also here. It is very short. I would only copy paste that for you.
http://www.gotquestions.org/new-heavens-earth.html
So, believers will go to "heaven" that is in fact new earth and new heaven=sky.

Thanks for the info. Very interesting perspective. Where do the bad guys go?

Ken

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:Paul, that was question for Kenny. I was not asking for myself.

Kenny, Paul replied you, right?

Do you share Pauls views of the New Earth for those who don't make it to Heaven?

Ken

As Jac said, that is not what Paul said.

Look also here. It is very short. I would only copy paste that for you.
http://www.gotquestions.org/new-heavens-earth.html
So, believers will go to "heaven" that is in fact new earth and new heaven=sky.

Thanks for the info. Very interesting perspective. Where do the bad guys go?

Ken

They will not be with God.

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:Paul, that was question for Kenny. I was not asking for myself.

Kenny, Paul replied you, right?

Do you share Pauls views of the New Earth for those who don't make it to Heaven?

Ken

As Jac said, that is not what Paul said.

Look also here. It is very short. I would only copy paste that for you.
http://www.gotquestions.org/new-heavens-earth.html
So, believers will go to "heaven" that is in fact new earth and new heaven=sky.

Thanks for the info. Very interesting perspective. Where do the bad guys go?

Ken

Who are the bad guys Kenny?
Those that choose NOT to be with God and since they choose not to be with God they will not be.
According to revelation, there will be a final death, a great death if you will, where all those that reject God, which means they reject all that is good and love, will be destroyed forever.
The bad will be judged and punished accordingly because God is a God of justice.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:

Kenny wrote:

1over137 wrote:Paul, that was question for Kenny. I was not asking for myself.

Kenny, Paul replied you, right?

Do you share Pauls views of the New Earth for those who don't make it to Heaven?

Ken

As Jac said, that is not what Paul said.

Look also here. It is very short. I would only copy paste that for you.
http://www.gotquestions.org/new-heavens-earth.html
So, believers will go to "heaven" that is in fact new earth and new heaven=sky.

Thanks for the info. Very interesting perspective. Where do the bad guys go?

Ken

Who are the bad guys Kenny?
Those that choose NOT to be with God and since they choose not to be with God they will not be.
According to revelation, there will be a final death, a great death if you will, where all those that reject God, which means they reject all that is good and love, will be destroyed forever.
The bad will be judged and punished accordingly because God is a God of justice.

So if I understand you correctly, those who worship the wrong God or no God at all will simply die and no longer exist rather than being forced to exist in the tortures of fire and brimstone? If I am wrong please explain. How about those who choose the right God but because of charater flaws and personal weaknesses, they continue to behave badly? Do they die as well or do they keep getting chances to get it right? Or do they get to live on the new Earth flawed?

Ken

Have you read Revelation?
Choosing God does NOT equal perfection, there is no perfection other than God.
Angels are closer to God than we currently are YET they are not perfect and because they too have free will, they can "fall from grace" as we know.

PaulSacramento wrote:Have you read Revelation?
Choosing God does NOT equal perfection, there is no perfection other than God.
Angels are closer to God than we currently are YET they are not perfect and because they too have free will, they can "fall from grace" as we know.

So what happens when imperfect sinful humans bring sin to the new world? Isn't it just a matter of time before they make the new world as sinful as the old world was? Kinda like what happened when Noah started anew?

Ken

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Have you read Revelation?
Choosing God does NOT equal perfection, there is no perfection other than God.
Angels are closer to God than we currently are YET they are not perfect and because they too have free will, they can "fall from grace" as we know.

So what happens when imperfect sinful humans bring sin to the new world? Isn't it just a matter of time before they make the new world as sinful as the old world was? Kinda like what happened when Noah started anew?

Ken

Ah, not THAT is an interesting question !
One I have often thought about.
Some argue that we will be perfect and sinless BUT I don't think that is possible, not even the angels are perfect and sinless and we will be like them in most/may ways.
Since we will still have free will, we will still be able to sin and rebel and go against God, just as some angels did and continue to do so.
The issue I guess is HOW different will we be from the angels and it seems that, according to Paul, we will end judge angels ( 1Corinthians 6:3) which means we will be higher than them.
It may be that we will be better able to fend off sin than the angels were.
That said, where there is free will there MUST be the possibility of not doing the will of God.

Personally I do NOT think that we will be perfect BUT I think that since we will live in the presence of God we will be like the original Adam and Eve BEFORE they sinned.

I think the question over Jesus' peccability helps here, Paul. We traditionally, and in an important sense rightly, teach that Jesus was impeccable, that is, that He could not sin. The argument is rather simple: Jesus is God; God cannot sin; therefore Jesus cannot sin.

But there is a distinction we need to make here that we will be able to make about the blessed, too. We need to distinguish between what I might call metaphysical impeccability (MI) and practical impeccability (PI). Something is MI if to speak of something as sinning would speak of a metaphysical contradiction. God, and only God, has MI. The reason is that sin presupposes an imperfection, and God cannot be imperfect, for perfect means (lit., by definition) "lacking nothing." So we can attribute MI to Jesus according to His divine nature. Something would be PI if even though the logical possibility of sin were present (that is, the attribution of evil to a think does not create a self-contradiction) such an outcome will simply never happen. By way of analogy, imagine I offer you a check for $100 and a check for $10,000. All things being equal, and assuming you are rational, is there any scenario in which you would choose the $10,000? Again, the key here is "all things being equal." I don't think you could never come up with a scenario in which $100 would be better than $10,000, but I do think all such scenarios would entail some inequality. The point is simple enough: a rational person will act rationally when and if they can. If they don't, it is only because there is some impediment to their doing so.

So I submit that we can also attribute PI to Jesus, here according to His human nature. Jesus was perfectly aware of right and wrong, of all possible scenarios and of every possible outcome to every action. More importantly, because of His two natures, He lived with the beatific vision in every moment of His life, which is to say, He saw God perfectly and clearly. So for Him, sin was different than it is for us. Whenever we sin, we do so because we are seeking some good and we convince ourselves (sometimes with very little work at that!) that the sin is a good way to achieve it. But Jeus saw it for what it was. And therefore, sin became an irrational choice. As such, there is no conceivable circumstance under Jesus would sin, because there could be no compelling reason for Him to do so. It was a practical impossibility.

Now, I submit to you that, in heaven (and on the new earth, for that matter), we will not have MI; only God will have MI. But we will all have PI. Our natures will be restored, so we will no longer have to deal with the sin nature. And more than that, we will see God, as Paul says, clearly, face to face. In the beatific vision, we will see perfect goodness, and next to perfect goodness, even the slightest imperfection will seem the infinitely horrible loss it actually is. And thus, for us, there will be no conceivable circumstance under which we would sin. Sin will not be a metaphysical impossibility but rather a practical one. And, if that were not enough, we will always be able to see the effects of sin by seeing those who will eternally live with that imperfection (so Isa. 66:24).

The bottom line: in the resurrection, the blessed will never again sin. Having seen God, there will never again be anything attractive in it. They will be sealed forever in their blessedness, just as the damned will be sealed forever in their rejection.

edit:

As far as angels sinning, here's a good explanation of Aquinas' argument: http://readingthesumma.blogspot.com/201 ... ngels.html

The long and short of it is that angels saw more of God prior to their fall than we do now, but that their mistake was in trying to obtain the beatific vision (what we would think of as being "saved") on their own rather than through God's grace. In other words, some angels, much like humans today, tried to be "saved" through their works rather than through God's grace.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Have you read Revelation?
Choosing God does NOT equal perfection, there is no perfection other than God.
Angels are closer to God than we currently are YET they are not perfect and because they too have free will, they can "fall from grace" as we know.

So what happens when imperfect sinful humans bring sin to the new world? Isn't it just a matter of time before they make the new world as sinful as the old world was? Kinda like what happened when Noah started anew?

Ken

Ah, not THAT is an interesting question !
One I have often thought about.
Some argue that we will be perfect and sinless BUT I don't think that is possible, not even the angels are perfect and sinless and we will be like them in most/may ways.
Since we will still have free will, we will still be able to sin and rebel and go against God, just as some angels did and continue to do so.
The issue I guess is HOW different will we be from the angels and it seems that, according to Paul, we will end judge angels ( 1Corinthians 6:3) which means we will be higher than them.
It may be that we will be better able to fend off sin than the angels were.
That said, where there is free will there MUST be the possibility of not doing the will of God.

Personally I do NOT think that we will be perfect BUT I think that since we will live in the presence of God we will be like the original Adam and Eve BEFORE they sinned.

Do you think it will be just a matter of time before sin contaminates? Or do you think everybody will be able to avoid it for eternity?

Ken

Jac3510 wrote:I think the question over Jesus' peccability helps here, Paul. We traditionally, and in an important sense rightly, teach that Jesus was impeccable, that is, that He could not sin. The argument is rather simple: Jesus is God; God cannot sin; therefore Jesus cannot sin.

But there is a distinction we need to make here that we will be able to make about the blessed, too. We need to distinguish between what I might call metaphysical impeccability (MI) and practical impeccability (PI). Something is MI if to speak of something as sinning would speak of a metaphysical contradiction. God, and only God, has MI. The reason is that sin presupposes an imperfection, and God cannot be imperfect, for perfect means (lit., by definition) "lacking nothing." So we can attribute MI to Jesus according to His divine nature. Something would be PI if even though the logical possibility of sin were present (that is, the attribution of evil to a think does not create a self-contradiction) such an outcome will simply never happen. By way of analogy, imagine I offer you a check for $100 and a check for $10,000. All things being equal, and assuming you are rational, is there any scenario in which you would choose the $10,000? Again, the key here is "all things being equal." I don't think you could never come up with a scenario in which $100 would be better than $10,000, but I do think all such scenarios would entail some inequality. The point is simple enough: a rational person will act rationally when and if they can. If they don't, it is only because there is some impediment to their doing so.

So I submit that we can also attribute PI to Jesus, here according to His human nature. Jesus was perfectly aware of right and wrong, of all possible scenarios and of every possible outcome to every action. More importantly, because of His two natures, He lived with the beatific vision in every moment of His life, which is to say, He saw God perfectly and clearly. So for Him, sin was different than it is for us. Whenever we sin, we do so because we are seeking some good and we convince ourselves (sometimes with very little work at that!) that the sin is a good way to achieve it. But Jeus saw it for what it was. And therefore, sin became an irrational choice. As such, there is no conceivable circumstance under Jesus would sin, because there could be no compelling reason for Him to do so. It was a practical impossibility.

Now, I submit to you that, in heaven (and on the new earth, for that matter), we will not have MI; only God will have MI. But we will all have PI. Our natures will be restored, so we will no longer have to deal with the sin nature. And more than that, we will see God, as Paul says, clearly, face to face. In the beatific vision, we will see perfect goodness, and next to perfect goodness, even the slightest imperfection will seem the infinitely horrible loss it actually is. And thus, for us, there will be no conceivable circumstance under which we would sin. Sin will not be a metaphysical impossibility but rather a practical one. And, if that were not enough, we will always be able to see the effects of sin by seeing those who will eternally live with that imperfection (so Isa. 66:24).

The bottom line: in the resurrection, the blessed will never again sin. Having seen God, there will never again be anything attractive in it. They will be sealed forever in their blessedness, just as the damned will be sealed forever in their rejection.

edit:

As far as angels sinning, here's a good explanation of Aquinas' argument: http://readingthesumma.blogspot.com/201 ... ngels.html

The long and short of it is that angels saw more of God prior to their fall than we do now, but that their mistake was in trying to obtain the beatific vision (what we would think of as being "saved") on their own rather than through God's grace. In other words, some angels, much like humans today, tried to be "saved" through their works rather than through God's grace.

Yes, very well put.
I agree.

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Have you read Revelation?
Choosing God does NOT equal perfection, there is no perfection other than God.
Angels are closer to God than we currently are YET they are not perfect and because they too have free will, they can "fall from grace" as we know.

So what happens when imperfect sinful humans bring sin to the new world? Isn't it just a matter of time before they make the new world as sinful as the old world was? Kinda like what happened when Noah started anew?

Ken

Ah, not THAT is an interesting question !
One I have often thought about.
Some argue that we will be perfect and sinless BUT I don't think that is possible, not even the angels are perfect and sinless and we will be like them in most/may ways.
Since we will still have free will, we will still be able to sin and rebel and go against God, just as some angels did and continue to do so.
The issue I guess is HOW different will we be from the angels and it seems that, according to Paul, we will end judge angels ( 1Corinthians 6:3) which means we will be higher than them.
It may be that we will be better able to fend off sin than the angels were.
That said, where there is free will there MUST be the possibility of not doing the will of God.

Personally I do NOT think that we will be perfect BUT I think that since we will live in the presence of God we will be like the original Adam and Eve BEFORE they sinned.

Do you think it will be just a matter of time before sin contaminates? Or do you think everybody will be able to avoid it for eternity?

Ken

I agree with Jac's view as he wrote above.
I believe that there will simply be no reason for it ( sin and sinning) at all.

Jac3510 wrote:I think the question over Jesus' peccability helps here, Paul. We traditionally, and in an important sense rightly, teach that Jesus was impeccable, that is, that He could not sin. The argument is rather simple: Jesus is God; God cannot sin; therefore Jesus cannot sin.

But there is a distinction we need to make here that we will be able to make about the blessed, too. We need to distinguish between what I might call metaphysical impeccability (MI) and practical impeccability (PI). Something is MI if to speak of something as sinning would speak of a metaphysical contradiction. God, and only God, has MI. The reason is that sin presupposes an imperfection, and God cannot be imperfect, for perfect means (lit., by definition) "lacking nothing." So we can attribute MI to Jesus according to His divine nature. Something would be PI if even though the logical possibility of sin were present (that is, the attribution of evil to a think does not create a self-contradiction) such an outcome will simply never happen. By way of analogy, imagine I offer you a check for $100 and a check for $10,000. All things being equal, and assuming you are rational, is there any scenario in which you would choose the $10,000? Again, the key here is "all things being equal." I don't think you could never come up with a scenario in which $100 would be better than $10,000, but I do think all such scenarios would entail some inequality. The point is simple enough: a rational person will act rationally when and if they can. If they don't, it is only because there is some impediment to their doing so.

So I submit that we can also attribute PI to Jesus, here according to His human nature. Jesus was perfectly aware of right and wrong, of all possible scenarios and of every possible outcome to every action. More importantly, because of His two natures, He lived with the beatific vision in every moment of His life, which is to say, He saw God perfectly and clearly. So for Him, sin was different than it is for us. Whenever we sin, we do so because we are seeking some good and we convince ourselves (sometimes with very little work at that!) that the sin is a good way to achieve it. But Jeus saw it for what it was. And therefore, sin became an irrational choice. As such, there is no conceivable circumstance under Jesus would sin, because there could be no compelling reason for Him to do so. It was a practical impossibility.

Now, I submit to you that, in heaven (and on the new earth, for that matter), we will not have MI; only God will have MI. But we will all have PI. Our natures will be restored, so we will no longer have to deal with the sin nature. And more than that, we will see God, as Paul says, clearly, face to face. In the beatific vision, we will see perfect goodness, and next to perfect goodness, even the slightest imperfection will seem the infinitely horrible loss it actually is. And thus, for us, there will be no conceivable circumstance under which we would sin. Sin will not be a metaphysical impossibility but rather a practical one. And, if that were not enough, we will always be able to see the effects of sin by seeing those who will eternally live with that imperfection (so Isa. 66:24).

The bottom line: in the resurrection, the blessed will never again sin. Having seen God, there will never again be anything attractive in it. They will be sealed forever in their blessedness, just as the damned will be sealed forever in their rejection.

edit:

As far as angels sinning, here's a good explanation of Aquinas' argument: http://readingthesumma.blogspot.com/201 ... ngels.html

The long and short of it is that angels saw more of God prior to their fall than we do now, but that their mistake was in trying to obtain the beatific vision (what we would think of as being "saved") on their own rather than through God's grace. In other words, some angels, much like humans today, tried to be "saved" through their works rather than through God's grace.

So if I understand you correctly, at that time people will have "practical Impeccibality" and the ability to see God; two things people do not have right now; so nobody will have the desire to sin. Is that correct?

Ken