ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Apr 30, 2006 1:10:34 GMT 10
korek sis
kaya yung attribute ng diyos na omnipresent? yung nasa sa lahat siya ng dako at bagay at nasa sa lahat siya ng kanyang mga nilikha at nilalang? totoo po yunh..
kaso nga lang ang tao ay may free choice at marami ang ayaw tumanggap sa Holy Spirit
but because God loves us all so well, laging naghihintay at laging nangungusap ang konsensya para tayo ay maghanap ng katwiran at gumawa ng mabuti...
nagi guilty tayo pag nakagawa tayo ng mali dahil merong DIYOS NA MAKAPANGYARIHAN NA NANGUNGUSAP SA PUSO AT ISIP about free choice naman..naalala ko noon naitanong ito ni always sa ibang thread.. bakit daw binigyan pa ng free choice...why does he allow us to choose the wrong path..bakit pinapabayaan Nya lang si Satan na itempt tayo...? if His ultimate plan for us is to Save us and be with Him...bakit may free choice pa... kung walang temptations..di na kelangan ng conscience di ba? bakit kelangan pa lagi may battle between good and evil? bakit di na lang nya iwipe out lahat ng evil and kunin na Nya tayo lahat... I believe all the angels did not experience suffering or temptations kaya dumating sa punto na naisip ng isa sa kanila (Lucifer) na he can be more powerful than God...sa tingin ko..ayaw Nya na mangyari din sa atin ito...so He moulds us from sufferings not because bored lang sya..but because He wants us to treasure and look forward to being with Him this is the ultimate joy of Christians..being happy and being positive amidst pain and suffering..because we are looking forward to a special day... tulog na po me..gudnite and God Bless po...
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Apr 30, 2006 1:12:30 GMT 10
cge bukas na hehe at antay naten ang iba pa
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 1, 2006 23:10:43 GMT 10
about free choice naman..naalala ko noon naitanong ito ni always sa ibang thread.. bakit daw binigyan pa ng free choice...why does he allow us to choose the wrong path..bakit pinapabayaan Nya lang si Satan na itempt tayo...? if His ultimate plan for us is to Save us and be with Him...bakit may free choice pa... kung walang temptations..di na kelangan ng conscience di ba? hi ruth
first hindi ko po alam ang lahat ng sagot sa tanong ng humanity but i will try to answer in the simplest way i can..
if God loves us so well, He will surely give us a free choice.. If we love somebody so well we would never imprison this somebody to things we only wanted. we will give this somebody a choice of his own.
If there were no free choice, man would never have a chance to show God he loves HIM because there would never be a struggle between fighting for God's righteousness , and if there would never be a struggle what are we for? a puppet only for God's own desire..and even if God planned us for eternal bliss still Man chooses what benefits only his flesh and not his soul..
parehas po ang Diyos that is why HE GAVE US THE FREE WILL and in return with these choices we can show HIM how much we love him by choosing HIS WORDS no matter what the costs..
itutuloy...
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 1, 2006 23:18:01 GMT 10
why does he allow us to choose the wrong path..bakit pinapabayaan Nya lang si Satan na itempt tayo...?
God allowed us to choose, he allowed us the free chance of choosing, if we choose the wrong path, it is our own desire and decision, to abort our choices means it is not free at all..
At first there was no SATAN, it was Lucifer the angel of light but because the angels were also given the free choices Lucifer chose to be Satan.
It is Lucifer's desire to tempt us not God's, It is Lucifer's choice to drag us into his fall, because the free will evolves throughout humanity as a GIFT FROM GOD to choose good from evil but MAN CHOSE OTHERWISE AND STILL CHOOSES AND WILL CHOOSE OTHERWISE..
If God would stop Satan in tempting Man, then that is NOT A FREE WILL, it will be A RESTRAINED WILL because Satan's own will would be restrined as i said, Satan's own desire is our fall and demise by tempting us.
now we use our free choices to succumb or to give in or not and with this free choice we can show God through this gift of choosing how much we love Him by deciding to do HIS will no matter what it takes..
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 1, 2006 23:31:43 GMT 10
kung walang temptations..di na kelangan ng conscience di ba?
dun sa garden of eden, nung ipagbawal ng Diyos kay Adan
"YOU SHALL NOT EAT THE FRUIT OF THE TREE OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL...
Conscience was needed there to judge wether Adam will obey or not, the conscience will decide.. kaya kailangan pa rin ang conscience...
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 1, 2006 23:39:12 GMT 10
I believe all the angels did not experience suffering or temptations kaya dumating sa punto na naisip ng isa sa kanila (Lucifer) na he can be more powerful than God...sa tingin ko..ayaw Nya na mangyari din sa atin ito...so He moulds us from sufferings not because bored lang sya..but because He wants us to treasure and look forward to being with Him
you can read about their orders and purposes specially the warriors like Michael the archangel how they fought against the fallen angels, does fighting with the same strength causes sufferings?
the angels were also tempted by Lucifer to side with him, it was one form of temptation because they have to choose between God and lucifer before the great war in heaven..
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 1, 2006 23:42:26 GMT 10
bakit kelangan pa lagi may battle between good and evil? bakit di na lang nya iwipe out lahat ng evil and kunin na Nya tayo lahat...
how would you know you won without a battle?
how would you know happiness without tears?
how would you know success without failures?
|
|
migy
Moderator
moderator in his designated rooms
Posts: 2,544
|
Post by migy on May 1, 2006 23:46:54 GMT 10
Ganda ng plano ng Diyos satin, una di tayo ginawang robot para maging sunud sunuran na lang, ang sumira lang satin ay yung choices natin between good and evil... Pero bago naman tayo gumawa ng evil nariyan ang conscience natin na me halong guilt sa puso natin kung gagawa ba tayo ng kasamaan o kabutihan.
Even sa mga taong ayaw maniwalang me Diyos, imposible na walang damdamin yang mga yan, damdamin/feelings na nagdidikta kung papano tayo susunod sa maling gagawin natin or sa mga taong gusto tayong pagawin ng alam nating mali...
Conscience was still a gift from God since God created men...
Lalim pala ng topic na ito...
cge po continue lang, read mode ulit ako...
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 1, 2006 23:54:59 GMT 10
Even sa mga taong ayaw maniwalang me Diyos, imposible na walang damdamin yang mga yan, damdamin/feelings na nagdidikta kung papano tayo susunod sa maling gagawin natin or sa mga taong gusto tayong pagawin ng alam nating mali
korek, lahat po tayo ay may konsensya, yan ang pagkakaiba natin sa mga hayop, at yan din ang patunay na lahat ng tao ay nilalang na kawangis ng Diyos...
kapag gumawa tayo ng masama, pansamantalang hindi nakinig sa konsensya, nawalan ng konsensya..
at pag tayo ay may ginawang tama at mabuti, nanaig ang konsensya..
|
|
|
Post by empire on May 2, 2006 0:53:13 GMT 10
i was wondering what is the difference between a soul and a spirit? and if a souland/or spirit exists where does it resides? hindi ba sa isip? (mind ) therefore the mind can be defined as the seat of the soul and /or the spirit
Beside as far as the bible concern,the spirit that we are talking about is resides innnnnnnn..... us which is belongs to God at pag ang isang tao ay pumanw ito ay babalik sa Diyos. and the soul is ito yong hahatulan christian or non christian ayo sa ating mga ginawa. and the body which is our outer look ay babalik sa alabok. we composed Body, Soul,and Spirit. I remember tuloy sina Germany cricket and Pinochio " Hey Pinoch." joke joke joke hi sis linsi cyensya na ngayon lang nakabalik uli sa p7 i'm too bc kasi this week at isa pa i was meditating the words of God coz gagamitin kasi ako this coming friday preach the words. don't worry i'm not a kind of person like what you are thingkingkung ano man ang nasimulan i will stand for it. it is the words that we are talking about "The Words of truth" palawakin po natin ang ating pananaw dahil maraming nagbabasa ng p7 at maraming napapadaan dito na di naman mananampalataya. we must emphasized the difference of Holy Spirit and Consciece in biblical way .
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 2, 2006 23:11:48 GMT 10
From sir empire.. Beside as far as the bible concern,the spirit that we are talking about is resides innnnnnnn..... us which is belongs to God at pag ang isang tao ay pumanw ito ay babalik sa Diyos. and the soul is ito yong hahatulan christian or non christian ayo sa ating mga ginawa. and the body which is our outer look ay babalik sa alabok. we composed Body, Soul,and Spirit.
merong pong dalawang klase ng teachings, dichotomy at trichotomy, sa dichotomy ang kanilang pinanghahawakan ay body and soul lang as God crated us as a living soul..
sa trichotomy, ang teachings ay body, soula and spirit..which in turn does not affect the major christian doctrines..I remember tuloy sina Germany cricket and Pinochio " Hey Pinoch." joke joke joke hi sis linsi cyensya na ngayon lang nakabalik uli sa p7 i'm too bc kasi this week at isa pa i was meditating the words of God coz gagamitin kasi ako this coming friday preach the words. don't worry i'm not a kind of person like what you are thingking
ahehe wala po meng iniisip na masama against anybody and againts you , when i engaged in discussions i see to it that i attack the topics and main ideas..not the person
kung ano man ang nasimulan i will stand for it. it is the words that we are talking about "The Words of truth" palawakin po natin ang ating pananaw dahil maraming nagbabasa ng p7 at maraming napapadaan dito na di naman mananampalataya. we must emphasized the difference of Holy Spirit and Consciece in biblical way .
sakto!, all i wanted to impart is when pagans believe in science wether it be soft or hard science, we as christians could see the greater implications in the bible..
example sigmund freud stated that the mind of man is divided into conscious and subconscious states..
the subconcious is the area where dreams reside and other paranormal experiences take place..
the consciousness is divided into id, ego, super ego and the super ego is the conscience which is the judge..
kung titingnan natin tama ang bibliya, kung ang Diyos ang source ng lahat ng tama at mabuti at ang super ego ay ang judge na nagdidikta ng tama at mabuti, at siya rin ang nagbibigay ng guilt kapag gumawa tayo ng mali.. ito ay ang boses ng Diyos.. wala pong pinagkaiba at tama ang bibliya..
ang bibliya ay para lang sa ating mga bible believers, paano yung ayaw maniwala at mga pagano? magkakarun po ng exclusivity at ito ang iniiwasan ko, dahil gusto ko sana ay maramdaman nila na sila man ay hinihintay ng Diyos ng mga Kristyano..hindi naman nangangahulugan ito na ako ay nag ko compromise..
ngayon kung ang faith ko ay in great question na dito ako magde declare ng faith ko..
we can relate to them by saying that what sigmund freud stated as the super ego is the conscience which is the voice of God.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 2, 2006 23:26:10 GMT 10
meron po akong tinanong about the parable of the sower
4 na klase ng lupa yun, isang lupa na tumanggap ng binhi or salita ng Diyos, tumubo at namunga, isang lupa na mabato, isang lupa na sa tabi tabi lang, isang lupa na puro tinikan
KJV Matthew 13:3-23 (3) And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow; (4) And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: (5) Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: (6) And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. (7) And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them: (8) But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.
yun pong 3/4 naaksaya ang binhi or salita ng Diyos.. pero itong mga lupang ito ay signify ang puso ng tao.. 4 na klase ng puso ng tao..
dun sa 3/4 na hindi tumanggap ng salita ng Diyos sila man ay marunong umisip ng tama at gumawa ng mabuti..
ano po ang guide nila? dahil hindi namunga at hindi nila tinanggap at hindi naniwala sa Holy Spirit pero marunong silang gumawa at mag isip din ng tama at gumawa din ng mabuti..
yun pong good samaritan, hindi yun kristyano gumawa siya ng mabuti ...
ano ang guide nila?
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on May 4, 2006 12:53:03 GMT 10
Hi Linsi,
A human moral action in order to become culpable needs the intellect and the will. The person needs to know what he was doing and has consented (willful) to do the act. If it is a good moral act it is called a virtue, if it is an evil moral act it is called “sin”.
Part of human nature is the intellect and the will. Free will is essential in our nature of being human. Man can not exist without free will and can not participate in moral actions without it. I explained before the reason why free will is necessary when God created Man is because free will is an element, which allows Man to love and serve God.
Love can not be called “true love” when you make a being “forced” to love you. In this analogy, you can arrive on the reason why God has to create Man with free choice to allow man “true love” in his relationship with God. Take away free will or the freedom to choose, then man ceases to “love” and his nature of existence is taken away.
I realize that there is a “catch” to this which is your predicament of choosing evil or sin before God. This is the reason why God has also created man the intellect or the ability to discern good from evil. There is also the natural grace of conscience, which allows man the same faculties of discernment. And finally, God has made a plan, which provides redemption or salvation in the event man falls into sin.
However, free will and freedom is not limited to a choice between good and evil alone. There is a choice between good and greater good. I feel this is the problem you encountered because you define freedom based on the moral choice of good and evil alone. And it should be noted that those who go to heaven and see God under the ultimate good would choose the greatest good.
The danger in interpreting the conscience as the sole arbiter of good and evil may set the perverted analogy that Man and not God determines law. A very dangerous precedent indeed which many philosphers (humanism) embraced.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 4, 2006 13:16:34 GMT 10
The danger in interpreting the conscience as the sole arbiter of good and evil may set the perverted analogy that Man and not God determines law. A very dangerous precedent indeed which many philosphers (humanism) embraced
hi kuya banshik
you are talking about a God, what i am trying to say is Universal. Papaano ang mga hindi naniniwala sa Diyos? Paano po yung mga theists, na naging agnostics and then finally naging atheists? paano yung mga dating maka Diyos na tumalikod at the end and embraced skepticism or atheism at the most?
they reject the notion of a God specially the christian God. This is what i am trying to explain. The conscience is given to judge us to choose evil from good, likewise it was the deciding factor for the first man to obey God or not. Since both scientifically, theoretically and philosophically agreed that the conscience is the judge which dictates us to do good over evil and choose righteousness then no one could dictate us to do good with righteousness but the VOICE OF GOD.
This is also the antidote for skeptics, the intangible element God has given to man to prove His existence.
as i said it before, salvation is another area of concern
|
|
migy
Moderator
moderator in his designated rooms
Posts: 2,544
|
Post by migy on May 4, 2006 18:46:20 GMT 10
"Commercial..."
Hey guys, let's take a short break, gumaganda po flow ng topic...
How about a Freewill to choose and your conscience dictates you since God gave men Freewill to choose for... (Believers or Non-believers)
Excuse lang po sa lahat, let's set asside Salvation muna....
I just want to focus on the issue of conscience from a believer and non-believer...
When i was a teenager and had this strange change of faith from Christianity to believing a pagan or cult practice who believes that Jesus is a man only... And still there is still small voice of my conscience that i believe who dictates me of what was am doing with myself, i supposed to believe that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Son of God therefore a God itself...
So does God created conscience for believers or non-believers...
Please share your contradictions on this stand, and your may continue to flow the topic from previous replies....
God Bless People...
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on May 5, 2006 11:18:50 GMT 10
Hi Linsi,
I would explain things again...
1. Why did God create man with Free Will?
God was aware that creating Man with Free Will would expose men to sin and corruption. However, one should look at the positive context of the nature of Free Will itself. Free Will is necessary for the bond of true love to exist between Man and God. A being can not truly love being coerced or forced.
Thus, Free Will is essential in the nature and existence of man. It is an element which allows man to express true love to his creator and at the same time an element to his salvation.
2. What is the role of conscience then?
Remember, we just described a human moral act as an act comprising both will and intellect of man. This means there is a natural means given to man to aid in his discernment apart from the Law.
The role of conscience is to allow man the ability to discern good from evil. It is universal in the aspect that all men were given the grace to use it. However, it is very specific in its application because conscience alone was never meant to be the sole arbiter of good and evil.
It is clear that man in his limited capacity may develop "false" conscience or the vice of justifying all his moral actions as "good" disregrading the precepts of both reason and moral law. Furthermore, as you have pointed out, men may reject the existence of God out of choice by claiming it is within human "conscience" that determines moral judgement.
This is a perverted philosophy since it has been established that conscience is a natural gift of God to man and must submit to the precepts of natural law and right reason. Furthermore, what use would be there of the Law if all is meant to be judge to mere human hands...
3. Is Free Will limited to a choice between Good and Evil alone?
This is where your predicament started by defining Free Will as achoice between Goog and Evil alone. The true nature of free will transcends this choice because free will in its nature can choose between good and a greater good. It also means that free will was created and given to man to use freedom to do good. This reinforces the divine aspect with wihich God creates free will as by nature a "good thing".
To abuse freedom is sin. We are aware there is a "side-effect" in which man under his limited capacity of discernment would choose sin. This is the reason that apart from giving the element of conscience, God has revealed to man His Law and provided a plan of redemption from sin.
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on May 5, 2006 11:27:08 GMT 10
Hi Ruth,
1. The angels are superior beings to man. They have a higher form of discernment which is the reason when they rejected God, they were immediately fallen and judged.
2. Temptation is not sin itself. We have to realize the value and power of free will of man that the devil can only tempt man but not coerce him to do evil.
God has to allow man to be exposed with temptation. God allowed it out of great love to man in order for us to have "true" love.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 12:51:51 GMT 10
From kuya banshik
The role of conscience is to allow man the ability to discern good from evil. It is universal in the aspect that all men were given the grace to use it. However, it is very specific in its application because conscience alone was never meant to be the sole arbiter of good and evil.
It is clear that man in his limited capacity may develop "false" conscience or the vice of justifying all his moral actions as "good" disregrading the precepts of both reason and moral law. Furthermore, as you have pointed out, men may reject the existence of God out of choice by claiming it is within human "conscience" that determines moral judgement.
kuya banshik you donot get my point you have branched out to your choice or perceiving premises, i was telling about the conscience which judges right from wrong and therefore chooses evil from good and right from wrong.
I have stated about freud's theory of id, ego and super ego in which among these three the conscience serves as the judge and guilt whenever we do wrong..
you have stated that it is not important to have the last say, and i think you are going in your own choice of perceptions again.
uulitin ko po the id, ego and super ego inwhich the conscience stands for the super ego because the conscience is the one which gives guilt whenever we do wrong..
ulit again
when you talk about false conscience it is not the CONSCIENCE AFTERALL, the mere fact that it is false declares it is not the conscience..
when you talk about dead conscience, again it is not the conscience because it is dead..
therefore CONSCIENCE in which i am pointing at is the CONSCIENCE WHICH DECIDES SOUNDLY, chooses right from wrong and good over evil..
and no other source could give human what is right and good than the VOICE OF GOD..
if however you are gearing towards another premises then that is not what i meant because man needs a vessel to contain that which is of GOD and that is the conscience, not the false conscience, nor the dead conscience.. because they are not conscience..
I AM TALKING ABOUT MAN'S CONSCIENCE WHICH DICTATES US TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT and that God is the source of what is right therefore the conscience is man's container for the voice of God. hope you get me now.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 13:03:40 GMT 10
3. Is Free Will limited to a choice between Good and Evil alone? This is where your predicament started by defining Free Will as achoice between Goog and Evil alone. The true nature of free will transcends this choice because free will in its nature can choose between good and a greater good. It also means that free will was created and given to man to use freedom to do good. This reinforces the divine aspect with wihich God creates free will as by nature a "good thing". To abuse freedom is sin. We are aware there is a "side-effect" in which man under his limited capacity of discernment would choose sin. This is the reason that apart from giving the element of conscience, God has revealed to man His Law and provided a plan of redemption from sin.
i would request a trimming down of the flow of ideas to just the conscience alone.. Free will is another area or concern i was pointing out at conscience which is the judge, the one who decides wether the free choice is right from wrong..
so please let us concentrate on the conscience alone for the mean time
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 13:04:27 GMT 10
conscience alone was never meant to be the sole arbiter of good and evil.
then what is the sole arbiter? God has designed conscience in the beginning, the conflict between good and evil is decided upon the id, and ego, where the battle resides, when the super ego which is the conscience dictates the final verdict and when the id and ego succumbed, afterwhich the super ego gives guilt after a crime or rebellion or violation then that super ego which is the conscienc is the arbiter..
How could man decide wether it is morally right? it is the conscience because what i was talking about here is the VOICE OF GOD..THE ONE WHICH GIVES GUILT WHENEVER MAN VIOLATES A UNIVERSAL GOOD..
to create a false conscience is not the function of the judge which is the conscience alone( super ego) even in the science of psychiatry, the super ego which is the conscience is recognized as the one who judges and gives guilt to wrongdoings
therefore this is the part of the human mind where GOD DICTATES and when man compromises or decides APART FROM THAT OF GOD THEN THE CONSCIENCE becomes non-functional, IT IS NOW CATEGORIZED AS FALSE OR DEAD
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 13:17:01 GMT 10
your coming in is greatly appreciated kuya banshik, i am also looking forward to sir empire to share his thoughts..hope always gets to see our discussions, migy and even frango, joshua, risker, ruth and everybody..
we are all friends, masarap lang matuto sa bawat isa.. because education and learning is a lifetime process.. let us contradict or agree for the sake of learning and see the clearer picture at the end with the help of our GOD
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on May 5, 2006 18:22:34 GMT 10
Linsi,
I did get your point.
1. It is not human conscience that dictates man's choices. It is the "will" and the "intellect". Conscience is just a part of both the will and the intellect that allows man to discern what is good and what is wrong.
To say that conscience precedes the will and the intellect is the same as saying that the sole arbiter of good and evil is man itself and God. I have explained the danger that if man interprets that conscience alone interprets moral law, it would fall into abuse of "false conscience".
2. What is "false conscience"? It is the human error of making man base moral justification based on personal standards. It disregards both natural law and moral law. For example, a false conscience would justify the "ends justify the means", or interpret that man should love and since love is a fundamental right - man can even have relations with the same sex. This perverted logic are just samples of false conscience. BTW. False conscience or "dead" conscience is also conscience itself. The only difference is that "false" conscience is a situation wherein man chooses to reject moral law and God as his standard but chooses a personal one. Besides, why call it false "conscience" if it is not conscience at all...
3. The danger of your expolanation with Freud's theory is it does not fully comprehend Christian Doctrine. It is disturbing to note that the explanation never took into account that "souls" form the core being of man. It also never took into account the moral laws and standards which Freud's scientific explanation. There is a prevailing danger into limiting it within Freud's theory simply because it focuses that conscience is solely a realm of man, and could lead to the conclusion that Man and not God judges moral law.
4. There are no misrepresentations of perceptions. The posts speak for themselves. There was no clear response or answer on the question why "free will" was created at the expense of man being able to sin until my response. Furthermore, it was also very clear that your scope on Free Will is was based on the premise of Good and Evil alone, and totally disregarded that a choice between good and the greater good is also present.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 18:33:14 GMT 10
1. It is not human conscience that dictates man's choices. It is the "will" and the "intellect". Conscience is just a part of both the will and the intellect that allows man to discern what is good and what is wrong.
you did not get my point kuya banshik
the will has two choices it is for the positive or negative, the conscience is the judge of the will. No, the conscience is not a part of both the will and intellect, the conscience is the sole judge where it just dictates what is right and good. the will chooses between right and wrong that makes it free..
If ever man chooses the wrong thing, his will chose it and therefore bypassed his conscience..
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on May 5, 2006 18:37:26 GMT 10
Linsi,
You can not request a trimming of ideas when the you have not explained and distinguished the difference between Free Will and conscience. One over the other has to be explained, and its relationship defined. In addition, I really suggest further reading on the nature of man because it may resolve some of the premises made.
Based on the previous posts, I have reason to believe that you are considering both Free Will and Conscience as one. Furthermore, it also suggests that based on your definition - the arbiter on moral judgment is man and not God.
When we say "arbiter" it means it is the standard on which choices are made. I agree that human conscience in part contributes to this standard, but the sole arbiter and standard is God represented thrugh His Word (Law).
Intellect and Will decides the outcome of moral action. Conscience is just a guide because man may choose to reject conscience out of weakness or what St. Paul termed as "concupiscience" (hope I spelled it right).
"therefore this is the part of the human mind where GOD DICTATES and when man compromises or decides APART FROM THAT OF GOD THEN THE CONSCIENCE becomes non-functional, IT IS NOW CATEGORIZED AS FALSE OR DEAD " linsi
And when you say that the human mind alone would follow what God dictates may be concluded that the human mind alone determines what Good and Evil is???
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 18:38:14 GMT 10
Concscience is a moral faculty that leads to feelings of remorse when we do things that go against our inbuilt moral precepts. Such feelings are not intellectually arrived at, though they may cause us to 'examine our conscience' and review those moral precepts, or perhaps resolve to avoid repeating the behaviour.
Commonly used metaphors refer to the "voice of conscience" or "voice within".
conscience is the sole judge, the will chooses between rioght from wrong that makes it free..
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 18:43:20 GMT 10
The only difference is that "false" conscience is a situation wherein man chooses to reject moral law and God as his standard but chooses a personal one. Besides, why call it false "conscience" if it is not conscience at all...
simply because when you say false conscience it refers not to the essence of conscience itself..because conscience is the judge a voice within which corrects us, gives us remorse or guilt upon doing what is wrong.. therefore conscience could never be referesed as false conscience, it is more addressed as the conscience or judge, a voice which dictates us t NOT to do wrong and gives us guilt when we do it.. i agree that when other says it is the voice of God, with its definition it is so..
others may refer to things with false or dead prefixes, but conscience is different..
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 18:46:17 GMT 10
3. The danger of your expolanation with Freud's theory is it does not fully comprehend Christian Doctrine.
that is my main point, when i said universal because i refer to people in terms which they can relate to our God.
wether they be pagans or not i wanted to impart that our God made us according ro HIS image and parts of us are intangibles like the conscience..
I am not into christian doctrines i am into the universal concept of a God and when further studies are demanded then the christian God must be seen.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 18:55:50 GMT 10
It is disturbing to note that the explanation never took into account that "souls" form the core being of man. It also never took into account the moral laws and standards which Freud's scientific explanation. There is a prevailing danger into limiting it within Freud's theory simply because it focuses that conscience is solely a realm of man, and could lead to the conclusion that Man and not God judges moral law.
that is the reason i was requesting for trimming down bcause i was only pointing at one simple attribute of God the behaviour which is morally rigth and good.
my message was simple that conscience is the vessel given by God to all His creatures which judges and dictates all to do what is right and good , and again when further studies demand then the essence between what is right and good shall be studied..
i meant a simple theory, just the conscience and i wonder why many has made it so complex, when in fact it is universally known that all men has the capacity to do what is right and good which the conscience judges and dictates, the judge which give us feeling of guilt whenever we do wrong.
I was pointing to our God who is the only source of good and righteousness, I was pointing to our God who made us and gave us the conscience to act as a judge and therefore a voice of his supreme goodness.
It was only in that point, to exceed from that point would be another studies like the free will, or what is good and bad, or what is evil and good..
Conscience is a solid part of us which acts as a judge that dictates us to do what is good, it is given by God and It reflects the voice of God.
Who could give us the feeling of remorse upon sinning if it is not God?
Now we are pointing at the truth of a christian God, which does not contradicts the characteristic of the conscience.
Freud does not give sufficient christian doctrines as a whole but i chose the conscience which go together with the attributes of our God built in our mind.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 19:03:56 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 5, 2006 19:05:54 GMT 10
i chose not to respond to your number 4 reply, i would rather create another topic for that
hey i always wanted to emphasize that i do respect your opinions but i guess i have the right to reason out
|
|