I hate that I have become a misotheist

[jpm (Phil McCurdy)]

@Vinnie

Moreover, since for everything God creates he could create something better (ST 1a 25.6c)

Reminds me of this quote regarding strawberries:

Doubtless God could have made a better berry, but doubtless God never did. –William Butler

POSTED ON JUNE 16, 2011 BY CREATE & DECORATE

2

[MarkD (A Whateverist, not a Christian)]

@Randy

I sometimes feel like we argue ourselves out of miracles, though.

Never heard that before but a good one. Perhaps some people just prefer the certainty of pessimism over the uncertainty of hope?

[Vinnie]

@St.Roymond

That’s true only if the text of the scriptures support those attributes – they are, after all, human philosophical notions. Omnipotence is my favorite example, because as classically defined it adds to what scripture actually says and leads to conundra that are artificial becausee of such adding.

If scripture is interpreted correctly and represents Revelation from God then it should cohere with what we learn from philosophy and natural theology—again—with the caveat of accuracy there as well. Scripture is a human philosophical notion as is science and both of our models of inspiration and hermeneutical approaches to it. My understanding of reality if four-pronged (like a fork). I learn from 1) science, 2) philosophy, 3) scripture and 4) experience/common sense. The order there is not meant to be significant of anything. My alarm bells go off when someone says, “That’s true only if the text of the scriptures support those attributes” because that is a loaded statement.

I wouldn’t say evolution is only true “if the text of the scriptures supports it,” or "this math solution is true only if “the text of the scriptures support it” or “the earth is billions of years old only if scripture supports it” and neither would I say that philosophical argument is only true “if the scriptures support those attributes.” I understand there is overlap in terms of philosophy and scripture here but the Bible portrays God in highly anthropomorphic fashion as a tribal deity at times. Making rainbows to remember his covenant, parading animals in front of Adam to see if he can find him a suitable mate, becoming refreshed on the sabbath, prone to change and anger, changing his mind, etc. To be sure these can all convey some truth via accommodation but the divine attributes like omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, divine simplicity, immutability are argued on metaphysical grounds and need to be addressed as such. They should inform how we interpret scripture. God parading animals in front of Adam to find him a mate shouldn’t be used to question omnipotence. I don’t consider the Bible completely univocal in its philosophical understanding of God, but rather read is as a pedagogical journey of understanding that gets closer and closer to the triune God-head of classical theism.

Vinnie: Moreover, since for everything God creates he could create something better
@St.Roymond : The Incarnation itself refutes this.

Aquinas would probably concede that God literally cannot create a better union than the hypostatic union, because it is a union with God Himself. Apples and oranges.

“The humanity of Christ, from the fact that it is united to the Godhead; and created happiness from the fact that it is the fruition of God; and the Blessed Virgin from the fact that she is the mother of God; have all a certain infinite dignity from the infinite good, which is God. And on this part there cannot be anything better than these…” ST 1.25.6.4

It doesn’t change the argument about a best possible world though.

Vinnie

[Vinnie]

@jpm

Good discussion. I am reminded of a saying my father had, “Whatever is, is best.” Certainly not a polished philosophy, but an observation of life from a farmer,

Reminds me of a show I watch. We watch a show called From (hoping it doesn’t tank like Lost) and it has a song at the beginning with the lyrics que sera sera (whatever will be will be).

Pixies - Que Sera Sera (Official Lyric Video)

I can’t quite pin it but it seems profound.

Vinnie

[Terry_Sampson]

I prefer Doris Day’s version: Doris Day - Que Sera Sera

[Vinnie]

Well the two versions certainly take the song in opposite directions–especially if you first encountered it in the context of the show From. Doris Days version has a melody that is playful and soothing. The Pixies version is slow, doleful, and hopeless. Fits with the show. Amazing how the same song can go in opposite directions. Maybe there is a warning there about limiting the meaning of certain scriptures by putting them in a box.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

Before affirming or denying how perfect or imperfect creation is you would have to set standards and parameters. I very much doubt whether even two let alone the billions of humans created would actually agree on either of them.

Richard

[Terry_Sampson]

@Truthspkr

We are in the very first age since the creation of the universe 6000 some odd years ago.

Surprise me and tell me that you are not a Young Earth Creationist.