I’m not sure you fully understand my view of God. We’ve barely scratched the surface here. For example, God upholds the entire universe and its laws. To me, that’s a much “bigger task” than giving us more money when we pray for it.
Because a truly godly Christian knows that material health and success in this world is quite inconsequential compared to eternal life and union with God which she is going to receive through Christ.
Again, God-centered, not man-centered religion.
By the same token, does one who believes that a God who was happy to create the universe and let go, a “bigger” God than one who needs to repeatedly intervene in His creation? I also note you straw-manned with money instead of health too btw.
The Japanese have a concept called wabi-sabi - there is beauty in imperfection. Perhaps, an imperfect universe is more beautiful than a so called “perfect” new creation? That the flaws are part of the beauty?
Why couldn’t the Creator be happy with His creation, and not need “a new Heaven and a new Earth”?
In fact, if the universe is really 14 billion years old, is this not general revelation evidence against a new Heaven and Earth?
Is not the evolutionary fact that we evolved from fish evidence against The Fall?
Is the geological evidence against Noah’s Flood also evidence against Judgement Day, and a future New Heaven and New Earth?
Because a truly godly Christian knows that material health and success in this world is quite inconsequential compared to eternal life and union with God which she is going to receive through Christ.
Again, God-centered, not man-centered religion.
You are writing what you believe to be true, and I appreciate that. Yet such a Christian approach sounds so insensitive and, dare I say it, confirmatory of Hitchens’ accusation that Christianity is a death cult.
Jesus, at least in the gospels, found physical health to be important enough to do several healings; they were not inconsequential at all.
I don’t believe in a God that created the universe and then “let go”. That’s a post-Enlightenment, modernist, deistic view of God which reduces him to a demiurge. Such a God is not big at all, but very small.
Here’s a really good book by David Bentley Hart which is very helpful on clarifying the concept of God. I really recommend it, perhaps just as much as Feser’s The Last Superstition. By the way, Hart is Eastern Orthodox, he’s also a universalist, and this book is not particularly written with a Christian viewpoint, but theistic, so it may connect with you more.
That’s one possible view. But that leads to a sort of Manichean dualism: that even in the beginning, good existed alongside evil. Notice that in this view, suffering and death are also part of the beauty of creation, and it will remain so forever. According to this view, the millions of deaths from COVID are beautiful. And you accuse Christianity of being an insensitive death cult?
At least in the Christian view, suffering and death are present in the world because of sin. If not for Adam’s fall and our subsequent plunge into corruption and brokenness, we would not have to fear death. Yet here we are. The thing is, in Christianity, we don’t view this state as normal or natural. In fact, we believe that there is a way out of this state of brokenness, which is provided by God himself, and part of his plan has already started to unfold with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. One day, this plan will be completed, and there will be a new heavens and new earth that restores things to what they were meant to be, not just spiritually but also physically.
We earnestly hope that all of this could happen as soon as possible. Christians do fervently pray for Jesus to return soon, as you can read in the penultimate verse of the Bible: “Come, Lord Jesus!” Yet for some reason God has chosen to wait. In the meantime, He instructs His people to keep preaching the Gospel and bring spiritual and physical healing to other human beings on Earth, aided by the Holy Spirit.
But that’s also why true Christians, unlike followers of dualism, weep for those who suffer and die from COVID. And they earnestly seek every means possible - whether medicine, science, prayer, community, or anything else - to relieve suffering and heal. They are a reminder of the brokenness of the world - a brokenness that Christians are called to try to fix as best as they can before Jesus returns and completes it. After all, Christians are aware that we are made in the image of God. Right now, we are the ambassadors and representatives of God on Earth, his hands and feet to accomplish his will.
But Jesus didn’t view physical health as the highest goal. After all, everyone of those people who Jesus healed (or even resurrected, in the case of Lazarus), would later die again in old age of disease. Even if everyone in the world is somehow instantly delivered from COVID-19, one day both you and I and everyone will still die some day, perhaps of other illnesses. That is a problem that is not fixed by miraculous but temporary deliverance from everyday illnesses.
That’s why Jesus willingly gave up his physical health and wellness on the cross in order to defeat death as a whole, not just temporarily. When Jesus was resurrected from the grave, his body was no longer subject to corruption (1 Cor. 15). It is a taste of what will come, one day: that each of us will be resurrected in the same way, and we will no longer be afraid of death in general.
This is also why if you look at when and how Jesus does miracles, it is not done as a general strategy to solve the brokenness of the world. Rather, Jesus performed healings and exorcisms to demonstrate who He is, and motivate people to follow Him and “never be thirsty for eternity”, receiving a “well of water springing up to eternal life”. The miracles are just a means to a greater end.
Jesus answered and said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again. But whoever drinks of this water which I will give to him will never be thirsty for eternity, but the water which I will give to him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.
(John 4:13-14)
Which religions ignore human depravity?
This misses the point. Science is neutral, and so are its inventions. These inventions could be used for beneficial or harmful purposes. Guns can be used to protect or harm people. Drugs can be used to restore health or cause ill health. Regardless of what they are used for, these inventions were made by applying scientific principles, and those scientists who make them deserve the credit not someone else.
If you want me to understand where you are going with what you are saying, it would help if you would make your points more directly.
To my knowledge, Christianity is the only religion that teaches about depravity, the inability for people to do anything to save themselves, that only God’s work can save.
I thought I was clear enough. Let me reiterate.
Gene editing via CRISPR was used to correct that lady’s sickle-cell gene, but it could also be used to reverse mutate it to the disease-causing allele. Regardless of what is done, the gene editing technology was developed by scientists and they deserve the credit not God.
Clear?
I disagree.
From a Christian perspective it makes sense to praise God for all the good that we see in the world (while also praising scientists and others through whom God works to do many of those good things)
BTW: I understand how CRISPR works and I understand the risks. I can still praise God for the healing the science provided. If CRISPR editing also made a cancer-causing mutation that could not be cured, I would also praise God for the time that she had with her family with renewed health now on earth in this life and I would also praise God for the future that she will have in her healthy new body in heaven.
In your view, as a Catholic, what does God do in this world?
Advice from one who bought it, don’t bother with “Scholastic Metaphysics”.
Before you give someone praise, wouldn’t it be necessary to find out if that person actually played any role in getting whatever outcome was desired? Why should you blindly praise God for something, if you have no proof he was ever involved?
Don’t give what belongs to scientists to God, since he was not directly involved in the painstaking research process which spanned decades. This attempts to push in God to get accolades without any evidence of participation irks me.
Fine, but I won’t. Scientists expend their time and other resources to understand nature and it comes with risks too. US citizens enjoy the benefits of nuclear energy, thanks to Marie Curie who suffered a painful death due to exposure to radiation. These people suffered to achieve these breakthroughs, so don’t bring in an opportunistic God to reap where he did not sow.
What if she was a die-hard satanist?
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one.
As a Catholic, for what do you praise God?
You’re being evasive. It would appear that your knowledge only pertains to Christianity.
How, in your opinion, does Hinduism ignore human depravity?
I am not being evasive. I know some things about other religions from my readings and studies, but will not claim to be an expert in any of them. Where do you see Hinduism teach that it’s followers should repent of their sins and look to God alone for their salvation? From things I have learned about Hinduism they believe in the law of karma. If they live a good life they will be reborn into a better life. If they do bad things in this life they will be reborn into a new life faced to live under worse circumstances
No we don’t, but considering its off-topic, let’s leave it to rest.
Life, family, good health and others. Sometimes I praise God, other times I don’t.
From the website you just sent:
Their mistakes can be forgiven if they uphold Dharma as a service to God. Further, the sins which they accumulate during their lives upon earth can be removed, neutralized or cleansed through austere self-effort and devotion to God.
In that view, human effort is required for forgiveness. That is the difference between that teaching and Christianity. With the doctrine of depravity, people cannot do enough good to be saved. People can only be saved through God’s work (for example through His self sacrifice on the cross)
Different means to the same end. How does the Christian way fare any better than the Hindu way?
Reread your last post and think more about the definition of the doctrine of depravity. If one believes the doctrine of depravity, God’s work is the only way. Man’s efforts would not lead to heaven
You are. You are not answering my question.
The question was,
I know, because I lived in India for almost 5 years. I hope that we can agree that Hinduism obviously does not ignore human depravity.