Good and Evil; Commoner's Views.
#41
(04-09-2015, 09:14 AM)Melkite Wrote: So physical and emotional contentment, but nothing like what we understand physical and emotional contentment to be.  So, could it be reasonable to say that it is disingenuous to put the idea in peoples' heads that one will be physically and emotionally content when it is nothing of the sort?  I noticed the passage you quoted said there would be no sea and there would be no night.  No beaches, no waves, no sunsets, no starry skies.  There is no existence where I could be content without those things.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to suppose that those things won't seem important any more?
Reply
#42
(04-09-2015, 11:29 AM)Dirigible Wrote:
(04-09-2015, 09:14 AM)Melkite Wrote: So physical and emotional contentment, but nothing like what we understand physical and emotional contentment to be.  So, could it be reasonable to say that it is disingenuous to put the idea in peoples' heads that one will be physically and emotionally content when it is nothing of the sort?  I noticed the passage you quoted said there would be no sea and there would be no night.  No beaches, no waves, no sunsets, no starry skies.  There is no existence where I could be content without those things.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to suppose that those things won't seem important any more?

Then why bother promising perfect contentment and happiness?
Reply
#43
(04-09-2015, 11:37 AM)Melkite Wrote:
(04-09-2015, 11:29 AM)Dirigible Wrote:
(04-09-2015, 09:14 AM)Melkite Wrote: So physical and emotional contentment, but nothing like what we understand physical and emotional contentment to be.  So, could it be reasonable to say that it is disingenuous to put the idea in peoples' heads that one will be physically and emotionally content when it is nothing of the sort?  I noticed the passage you quoted said there would be no sea and there would be no night.  No beaches, no waves, no sunsets, no starry skies.  There is no existence where I could be content without those things.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to suppose that those things won't seem important any more?

Then why bother promising perfect contentment and happiness?

I'm talking about beaches and night skies, not contentment and happiness.
Reply
#44
(04-09-2015, 11:53 AM)Dirigible Wrote: I'm talking about beaches and night skies, not contentment and happiness.

Sorry, I misunderstood you.  Does it matter whether they will seem important or not?  That they bring one contentment alone seems to validate them to me.
Reply
#45
(04-09-2015, 12:27 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(04-09-2015, 11:53 AM)Dirigible Wrote: I'm talking about beaches and night skies, not contentment and happiness.

Sorry, I misunderstood you.  Does it matter whether they will seem important or not?  That they bring one contentment alone seems to validate them to me.

So, if torturing cats or masturbating or making lots of money by means of usury (to give just a few examples) brings one contentment, then they are validated and okay??

Reply
#46
(04-08-2015, 10:23 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(04-08-2015, 06:59 PM)J Michael Wrote: Hey, Melkite...what say you, my brother?

It seems the ancient and modern understandings of happiness are more or less the same, with the only difference that in the dichotomy between virtue and contentment, one places more importance on one than the other, but both view both as vital to achieve happiness.

If Christ turns the contentment portion upside-down, then I do not understand why anyone would desire heaven.  Kreeft seems to be saying that Christ has extricated contentment from blessedness, and that one should only expect blessedness stripped of contentment should they achieve heaven.  The priest at my church once told me God is the greatest of narcissists, and if all we can expect of eternity is either torment or being good in his sight, but contentment is eternally lost regardless, then I have to agree he must be a narcissist.  If there is not perfect contentment in existence, then existence is perfectly undesirable.

Where does Kreeft say or imply  "...that Christ has extricated contentment from blessedness, and that one should only expect blessedness stripped of contentment should they achieve heaven."?  I might have missed that.

Another point--it might be interesting to look at what "blessed" and "blessedness" actually mean.  Here's one discussion of it I found.  A very simple, uncomplicated definition of "blessed" would be "made holy; consecrated".
Reply
#47
(04-09-2015, 12:38 PM)J Michael Wrote: So, if torturing cats or masturbating or making lots of money by means of usury (to give just a few examples) brings one contentment, then they are validated and okay??

Are sitting at the beach, listening to the waves, watching the sunset and stargazing immoral and harmful to others?  You're beginning to grasp as straws.  Are you as adamant to defend the Church at all costs as you accused me of for denying the Church?

(04-09-2015, 12:44 PM)J Michael Wrote: Where does Kreeft say or imply  "...that Christ has extricated contentment from blessedness, and that one should only expect blessedness stripped of contentment should they achieve heaven."?  I might have missed that.

Well, he said Christ turned the understanding of contentment upside-down and said that those who were blessed are those who are basically in some sort of misery in this life.  It was the section where he described Christ's definition of happiness.  If that was not an implication that Christ has extricated contentment from blessedness, I don't know what is.  It was as close to explicit as you can get without actually being explicit.
Reply
#48
There is untold plenty of evidence for the existence of God, the Incarnation, Resurrection the Truth and purity of Christianity, etc. etc. for those that have eyes to see and ears to hear.

However, Melkite, anyone who wilfully does not want any of that stuff will never be convinced even if Lazarus was raised from the dead before their very eyes. If you abhor wisdom, virtue, Heaven, transcendent God and all that, I have it on good authority that there is an alternative.

I like to paraphrase a bit of Genesis to illustrate the point: The Serpent said to Eve "You know why He told you not to eat that fruit? He knows that if you eat it you will be as gods and you can decide for yourselves what is good and evil".

Anyhow, have a flick through this lot and see if you can come up with a self-deifying explanation.

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/libr...orrupt.htm
Reply
#49
(04-09-2015, 05:00 PM)Oldavid Wrote: There is untold plenty of evidence for the existence of God, the Incarnation, Resurrection the Truth and purity of Christianity, etc. etc. for those that have eyes to see and ears to hear.

However, Melkite, anyone who wilfully does not want any of that stuff will never be convinced even if Lazarus was raised from the dead before their very eyes. If you abhor wisdom, virtue, Heaven, transcendent God and all that, I have it on good authority that there is an alternative.

I like to paraphrase a bit of Genesis to illustrate the point: The Serpent said to Eve "You know why He told you not to eat that fruit? He knows that if you eat it you will be as gods and you can decide for yourselves what is good and evil".

Anyhow, have a flick through this lot and see if you can come up with a self-deifying explanation.

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/libr...orrupt.htm

I can't help but wonder if there's really any more to say, at this point, to our friend Melkite.  It seems to me more and more as these discussions continue that he fits what you write in your 2nd paragraph as someone who "willfully does not want any of that stuff [of the 1st paragraph] ..." and just plain does not want to have eyes that see and ears that hear.



Melkite, someone, either in this thread or another, suggested that you spend less time debating with us here on the internet (fun though it might be) and more time in prayer, deep prayer, and in what they referred to as "the tomes", I think.  In order to believe and to have faith you have to *want* to believe and have faith.  Failing that, as Fr. Tom Hopko once suggested somewhere, you have to at the very least want to want to believe and have faith.  You won't be "convinced" intellectually, because, even if you wanted to faith is about much, much more than just intellect though intellect is of course important, too.  Boiling everything down to contentment or  a modern version of happiness, thinking in terms of "if it feels good, do it, and if no one else is hurt it can't be bad, in fact it must be good because it makes me happy" just won't get you there, unless the "there" is nowhere and non-existence.  If that's want you want, go for it--but I think you'll end up regretting it.

I really don't know what else to say to you, Melkite, and I'm tiring of going 'round and 'round.  So, I too will suggest to you to take some time, as much as you need, pray, pray, pray, pray, and pray some more.  Even spend some time with Christ if there's a chapel of perpetual adoration near you.  Ask for faith--if you want it, that is.  Ask for increased belief--if you want it, that is.  Ask for God to help you with all of this and to guide you-------if you want it, that is.  Then...**be quiet** and watch and listen for His answers--even if it takes months or even years.
Reply
#50
That's only a starter.

This Good stuff.............. what is it and where can I get some?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)