Humanities & Classics 1002
|
|
Renaissance Forum
Humanities & Classics 1002 |
    |
|
In Reply to: Re: Reply to god posted by Hillary Owens-Hamlin on December 10, 1998 at 22:28:22:
Hillary,
That was a good, inteligent response. And, that is also about the only thing I've been convinced on. I've been thinking about free will for quite some time. It does seem unjust to me that God could create something imperfect, but your argument does have a lot of sense to me at this point.
Your argument is also supported by one of the texts we were assigned, one which I found very convincing, so I figured I'd share it with all of our readers out there. This was from "Of the Dignity of Man"
"The Artist kept wishing that there were someone to ponder the rationality of so great a work,to love its beauty, and to wonder at it's vastness...But in its final creation it was not he part of the Father's power to fail as though exhausted...It was not the intention of his kindly love that he who was to praise God's divine generosity in regard to others, should be compelled to condemn it in regard to himself... with thine own free will in whose hand I have placed thee. I have set thee at the world's center, that thou mayest from thench more easily observe whatever is in the world...Thou shalt have the power to degenerate into the lower forms of life,which are animal; thou shalt have the power, out of thy souls' judgment, to be reborn into the higher forms of life, which are divine."
This, seems to be in support of a Christian God, and fairly well explains my problem with the imperfect human argument. I've thought it over for a couple of days, and I believe that it is a convincing and fair argument, unless someone else can see a flaw in it that I am missing.
There are many problems left, problems which philosophers have argued over for years, but those will never be solved.