God's Permission of Moral Evil w/ Fr. Gregory Pine, O.P. & Prof. Thomas Osborne

[@daviddabrowski01]

When you’re forced to speed the video up to 1.75 for the guest and then slowing it back down to 1 for Father Pine haha

[@gentilenation1117]

God’s providence is what He provided us because He cares, right? But it was humanity who choose what to do with that provision. After humanity made a choice, then God is out of it. God provided us again a salvation because He cares. Yes, God is provident and forever faithful with humanity.

[@JamesMC04]

God is always active, always working, never absent from creation. So to put it: for time-conditioned language like that is, inescapably, wholly inadequate when speaking of God. Totally agree with the last line though.

[@gentilenation1117]

⁠@@JamesMC04this is my concept of God being out of it, I hope it is not heresy on my part: I have this thing about God creation, He set a consequential default for humanity in any of our choices and if the default is being stirred, it is triggered automatically but the effect could be right away or at times it could be on following generation to come. (This explain why the toddler drown, great grandpa might have done something wrong in his past).

[@margueritelangton6362]

Lions eat antelope with great enjoyment!!

[@SuperSaiyanKrillin]

One the difficult questions I would like to try and have answered - wouldn't it be evil or at least wrong if someone made a conscious choice NOT to save the drowning toddler that falls into a swimming pool ? In other words - if the person allows the toddler to just die and refused to save them, isn't this considered morally wrong ? Perhaps even a mortal sin of omission ? Yet it seems like God is in this exact same position - he is omniscient and knows the toddler is drowning in the pool and makes the choice not to save them (by sending down an angel or something) but his refusal somehow imparts no moral wrongdoing on his part. How to make sense of this ?

[@kevinntiyakunze7720]

To answer the question, our Lord has done something. Just as the toddler does not know how to swim He has revealed his Word to us so we have the knowledge of the truth and in the case of not having the strength to swim meaning our "will" not being able to resist sin even if we know it's bad, He has given us Grace to overcome sin.

[@SuperSaiyanKrillin]

@@kevinntiyakunze7720 I don't really understand. Are you saying the toddler fails to resist sin by not having the strength to swim ?

[@kevinntiyakunze7720]

Yes like how a toddler can't swim without being I can say carried by his or her parent so also our wills we can't entirely resist sin without Grace.. it's like our flesh drowns us to death..

[@daviddabrowski01]

My guess is you’re assuming life ends at death and that suffering has no meaning. Even the suffering of a drowning toddler has a redemptive end. The toddler, if baptized, goes directly to heaven to a vision that we would all gladly drown for 100 times over if given the chance. My explanation is short and glib and perhaps even devoid of empathy but that’s a whole nother topic in it of itself.

[@JamesMC04]

We are creatures, within the net of relationships we call the created universe. None of that is true of God. My cat is not human - she is a cat. As a human being, I cannot have the catly knowledge of her that she can have, and in some manner does have. She behaves to me as though I were - in effect - a cat, because that is what she is. So her perception of the creation is conditioned by *what* she is, by the *manner in which* she is, and by *the specific individual "person"* she is. Drawing analogies between how we should act, and how God "should" (we perhaps think) act, is a bit like that. But God is no more a human than He is a cat. So our perception of God's justice, which is conditioned by who & what & how we are, is unavoidably fragmentary, blurred, and incomplete. This is partly why faith - which includes trust - is so very important. For it makes the Goodness and Justice of God vividly solid and real to us, even though we cannot clearly see how God acts in ways that are good and just. That which we cannot perceive as real, we know through faith to be entirely real.

[@wungabunga]

Without sin and suffering life is meaningless. No redemption, no need for God’s grace, no understanding nor relationship. Ok I’ll watch now and see if I’m on the right track. 😅

[@edmondironside240]

Without suffering life is meaningless. Without sin life is infinitely better. Our Lord lived without sin and He was the most important life to have ever lived on earth.

[@wungabunga]

@@edmondironside240 Yes but in order to strive towards the perfection of Jesus you need to overcome sin. So sin is essential.

[@anthonyw2931]

​​@@wungabungaovercome evil not sin. Sin is death and a terrible scourge to our souls. Edit: actually, we cannot overcome come anything, not without God's grace. The prof explains it very well.

[@anthonyw2931]

​@@edmondironside240amen

[@msgoody2shoes959]

No but the church does

[@michaelflores9220]

Cataracts can cause blindness, cataracts have existence, they are not a privation.

[@gmac8586]

Yes of course God allows evil because he allows free will.

[@xaviervelascosuarez]

I don't think you can say that God causes sin in any sense. You could say, maybe, that God causes the condition for sin, which is free will. But free will is a necessary exception that God makes to his omnipotent Providence and sovereignty in order to allow for the greater good that is the loving union between him and mankind. Strictly speaking, I don't think you can even say that God causes the condition for sin when, in truth, it is the condition for love and union what God causes, and that condition necessarily entails the allowance of sin.