July 24th, 2013
09:33 AM ET
Security raised to`high risk' for pope in Brazil
By Eric Marrapodi and Miguel Marquez, CNN
Rio De Janiero (CNN)– The papal visit is now classified as the highest level of security after an incident involving his motorcade.
The Pope's visit has been raised to "high risk" from "medium risk" after his car got stuck in a crowd of enthusiastic followers on Monday, a Brazilian Federal official told CNN.
The source says the problem in part stemmed from the Pope himself instructing drivers not to avoid the crowds.
After the pope arrived in Brazil on Monday he got into a silver hatchback Fiat for the drive from the airport to downtown Rio. Transportation officials in Rio said there were a variety of routes the pontiff's motorcade could have taken. The route they chose ended up pinning the pope's vehicle between a bus and a crush of well wishers who were reaching into the car to touch the pope.
Security officials in Rio huddled for much of the day on Tuesday sorting out how to resolve the incident.
Federal authorities are now taking a larger role in the overall security of the pope during his time in Brazil. More reinforcements are coming for security from Rio.
Hundreds of thousands of pilgrims from around the globe have come to Rio de Janiero for World Youth Day, a week long festival held every two years.
The Vatican told reporters Tuesday night that 500,000 people came to Copacabana beach for the opening ceremony and Mass. Crowds stretched down the beach more than a half a mile from the main stage.
On Tuesday, Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia told National Catholic Reporter that the group of pilgrims from his archdiocese is small because of security concerns.
"I think there's been a sense across Pennsylvania," he told NRC while in Rio, "that this might be a dangerous place for young people to come."
"I know that a number of dioceses in Pennsylvania actively discouraged their young people from coming and didn't sponsor diocesan pilgrimages on purpose," he said.
About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.
the Christian god is about as real as santa claus.
both are in lots of books.
santa delivers more presents than god ever delivers on prayers
there is no evidence for either
children get told of both and believe because their parents tell them to believe. smart people eventually grow out of both foolish tales. infantile minds stick with the delusion.
Judging by your past remarks over the past 2 hours, you seem to be a very bitter person. For someone who is so "convinced" that there is no God, you seem to be making a lot of posts to reassure yourself of your BELIEF.
I'm not trying to reassure myself. I'm trying to save you from your foolishness. 🙂
Well for someone who claims to be seeking the truth, come back to me when you have some empirical proof that God is non existent. Until then, I will continue to have faith in what you call a fairytale.
Seems like you have a bargain basement messiah complex dog. I doubt you can even save yourself from anything.
surely the burden of proof falls to you?! You are the one claiming an imaginary friend when there is absolutely no proof of its existence.
I am just saying that I believe what there is proof for. Surely that's just sanity.
No, I don't need to prove anything. You are the one who claimed you are trying to save me from my "foolishness". If you want to do that, then you need to offer up a better argument than your repeated bigoted remarks. I though, am only concerned about your ignorance, not whether you believe in God or not.
since I know there is no god, why would I want to ever be one.
I am just pointing out how full of holes your whole belief system is. Based on all your beliefs and based on the stories in your bible, your god is either very inept or very evil.
Really Mark? Really?
You believe in an imaginary man in the sky, without any proof of that imaginary man's existence, and I have to prove to you that he doesn't exist?
trust your senses. use your mind. use logic. break free from the delusion that your parents have yoked you with.
Actually, you "know" nothing. You think you are aware of something, that is all.
I have no bible. Could you quit guessing for a minute and trying to make this a personal argument. It seems many people on here have a problem with organizing their thoughts and want to make a general topic on belief into an arugment on personal belief. Sorry, that's a fail any way you look at it.
Funny you say that Dog, about breaking free from the way my parents raised me. I actually grew up in a household that never even mentioned religion. It was not until my 20s that I became baptized after reading the Bible and countless religious literature, without the provocation of anyone to pursue it. I believe I have found the truth, and it has made me a much better man. This will be my final post because I believe it is best that we agree to disagree at this point, because we are going in circles. God bless my friend.
Judging from your remark, you like to project.
I guess you touched a nerve, doG.
dogs ain't big on touchin', but devourin' is a whole nuther matter.
That's got to be the cheapest and shortest limousine yet. The policeman's Harley Road King is almost as big and would have provided just as much protection to the pope.
all this talk about "free will" is asinine!
if god is omnipotent then there isn't really any free will because god controls everything. if we do have free will then god has no control over anything.
what sort of an insecure, passive-aggressive sadist god is he if he created us this way then watches over us for a chance to punish us when we do things he designed us for in the first place!
There is no God OR free will. Our thoughts and actions are nothing but a complex set of chemical and biological processes that theoretically could be measured and predicted.
"if god is omnipotent then there isn't really any free will because god controls everything."
I always think it funny when people puts limits on a omnipotent being. If god is that powerful, he could choose not to do what you (the finite being with a small amount of brain power) think is right.
"if we do have free will then god has no control over anything."
Unless it was his will for us to have free will. If he is all powerful, could he not do that?
"what sort of an insecure, passive-aggressive sadist god is he if he created us this way then watches over us for a chance to punish us when we do things he designed us for in the first place!"
Ah, more complaints from the finite one. Placing judgement upon a theoretical being he could never possible understand...let alone judge.
Simple plan guaranteed to work. Next time his car is mobbed, have one of his guards shout (on a bullhorn): "Look over there! There is the Virgin Mary image on a piece of toast!" The Catholic mob will stumble over themselves trying to find the piece of toast, and voila! the popemobile disappears.
That's really pretty funny.
Are you aware that the pope himself directed the driver not to avoid crowds. Maybe he doesn't see it as a problem.
Don't get a rash, Bill, it was just a joke.
Bill has trouble recognizing jokes.
I like t his pope but he is asking for trouble. He need to realize, there are idiots out there who want to go into history. He needs to realize he is no longer a bishop.
They just wanted to get up close and personal...
If I was powerful enough to have created the universe, I wouldn't allow the Catholic Church to use my name to steal money from poor people. That’s the difference between me and your God.
Sad to see that you persist in illogical arguments when your fallacies have been shown to you. Oh, I forgot, you're an atheist. Go ahead then.
pot meet kettle, kettle meet pot.
Sad to see that you persist in illogical arguments when your fallacies have been shown to you.
Please remember this
Yeah, last time I asked for an example of a fallacy I had posted, my accuser had to admit he had none. Shall I add you to that column?
I really dont care what list you put me on
@Bill ... you just imagined that victory to make yourself feel better.
So, your answer is "No Bill, I can't recall a fallacy I've ever heard you post but I refuse to stop accusing you of it anyway cuz that's how I roll"
Did I hear you correctly?
Here, let me lob you one: "The problem with atheist is they are great on the offense but not so much on the defense. As long as the argument is focused on the attack on religion, they maintain an advantage. But, they are precisely incapable of advancing a positive statement of social structure out of their nonbelieve without resorting to violence."
Where's the fallacy?
Since god is a fallacy, your postings of this type are too numerous to mention.
Are you saying that unless an athiest can make "a positive statement of social structure out of their nonbelieve without resorting to violence" then your god exists??
Straw man arguement maybe??
Hey Bill – why do Catholics oppose contraception?
Yet they give the second most amount of aid to the poor, only behind the Federal Government. Since you seem so concerned about the poor, why don't you get off the internet and go do something? Oh wait, that would require sacrifice, something you are afraid of.
You only think that because no one yells louder about how much 'good' they do like the faithful. People who are not religious usually go about giving to charity QUIETLY and don't end up on some inflated list. Idiot
How do you know he doesn't?
If I was powerful enough to have created the universe, I wouldn't be so narcissistic that I would want people to worship me. That’s the difference between me and your God.
Yet you ARE narcissistic enough to make several comments here that are not only factually inaccurate but indicate you're rather arrogant to think your beliefs are so high and mighty you can use them to bash another faith you perceive as inferior. My God teaches me to be humble and to love others – what about yours?
firstly, there is no god. So you mean "your priests or your parents or your bronze age voodoo book" teaches you, not "your god teaches you.
secondly, all I am saying is if I had all the powers you attribute to your god, I wouldn't make the world such a pain filled miserable place. It would be perfect, just as you claim your god is.
or are you saying your god isn't perfect?
actually, God is perfect, he's flawless.. it is your action that is not perfect.. why? because God wants us to make our responsibilities to take care of.. God only teaches us through Holy Bible.. your point is flaw.
"God wants us to make our responsibilities to take care of." ... huh?
God's primary characteristic is jealousy.
A relationship predicated on jealousy is an unhealthy one.
Ergo, God is not perfect.
My God teaches me to be humble and to love others
Do you hear his voice?
wow high demand! lol.. Simple, want to hear God's voice? go read Holy Bible, ask Jesus for forgiveness, and salvation.. then you will hear his voice through Holy Bible.. cheers!
Please explain how the bible can be god's voice given that the King James version of the new testament was completed in 1611 by 8 members of the church of England. There were (and still are) NO original texts to translate. The oldest manuscripts we have were written down 100's of years after the last apostle died. There are over 8,000 of these old manuscripts with no two alike. The king james translators used none of these anyway. Instead they edited previous translations to create a version their king and parliament would approve. So.... 21st century christians believe the "word of god" is a book edited in the 17th century from the 16th century translations of 8,000 contradictory copies of 4th century scrolls that claim to be copies of lost letters written in the 1st century.
Simple, want to hear God's voice? go read Holy Bible
That is not god's voice
What's the matter Dog, never read the Didache?
The Didache is an anonymous work written after the apostles, not by.
Hey, who was the real father of Jesus anyway. Does anybody know?
Old news. Move along.
You can tell when a person becomes to popular and powerful for their own good. When their security detail is larger than their following. How can you be a pope or ayatollah or even a political leader who must be separated from his following by castle walls and bulletproof glass?
I don't think the protection is necessarily for his followers. Powerful people usually have lots of detractors willing to use violence against them.
Yep. Case in point: The attempted assassination against Pope John Paul II a few decades ago, which is what prompted the Popemobile in the first place. Prior to that, they felt no need for such extra measures because it didn't seem necessary.
can't he just pray to be safe? Wouldn't god listen to the pope? if not to him then what hope have the rest of us got to have our prayers heard?
what a crock!
Basically, a waste of time. And why is that?
From an astute blogger as noted a few years ago:
o “Now Rome which developed the Church of Dogma (rather than metanoia) dared to add things which have scant basis in scripture like the Trinity, Individual priesthood, Auricular Confession, Transubstantiation, Infallibility, Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. None of these are present in scripture nor can they be deduced. Matthew 16:18 was discovered to apply to the papacy by Damasus I who had over a hundred of his rival's supporter's killed to gain the bishopric of Rome. It is after this time that the phrase from Matthew is more and more centered on Rome. The bishops of Rome committed many crimes. The biggest one was to ascribe their malfeasance to the Holy Spirit. Still is.”
if I knew men were molesting children using my name, I would stop them! That's the difference between me and your god!
Yes, DD we've been down this path before. If you were God everything would be right and everyone would love everyone and nothing bad would ever happen and the deficit would be eliminated and all the men would be good looking and all the women strong and all the children above average and a chicken in every pot and free beer on Fridays and we'd all like it whether we wanted to or not.
To be fair, who wouldn't want that?
To be fair, it would serve no purpose.
You assume that if there is a god, there must be justice in this world. I don't believe in god, but your logic is flawed.
People who like strong men and good looking women. People who don't drink beer. People who serve under average children. Question: How can all children be above average? If all men are good looking, who sets the standard? If all women are strong how do we measure strength?
Again, Alias, as a non believer punctures the illogical approach of another non believer. My compliments sir
I didn't say that nor did I imply it. Your reading comprehension is flawed.
People who don't drink beer must be banished from the land. My p.enis can be the arbiter of attractiveness.
"If all women are strong how do we measure strength?"
Why would we need to measure strength? Why would we need to rate one another? Why do you think one human is more valuable than another simply based on your perception of beauty?
I don't believe those things facts. I'm showing as Alias does and as C.S. Lewis taught us in the 1930's that people who pine for a "perfectly just world" as evidence for God, ala DD, have a flawed argument.
To answer your question more directly; if there is no standard for beauty and no measure of strength then we are equally accurate to say all the men are ugly and all the women are weak. In other words, we are left with two choices. We must either accept that there is a standard of perfection; perfect goodness, perfect beauty, perfect strength and perfect love. Against this standard, we will necessarily fall short and thus there is injustice. Or, we must accept that there is no standard for anything, including morality. With no standard then one is never justified in condemnation of anything since it cannot be measured against a standard. In which case we would have the world D describes in which there is no injustice. Not because otherwise unjust causes don't occur but simply because we have no ability to measure them.
@I'm sorry dave,
You said if you were god you wouldn't let people molest children in your name. you also said you would want aworld where nothing bad ever happened. Part of reading comprehension is drawing obvious conclusions from what is written.
Dyslexic Dog said he wouldn't allow child molesters to go free if he was god.
I'm sorry Dave posted in response to Bill Deacon's diversionary example of a perfect world. As I pointed out below, expecting children to be safe in the presence of their spiritual leaders and for those who break the law to be arrested is not wishful dreaming of utopia.
It looks to me like you are lumping DD and Dave's posts into one by mistake?
"We must either accept that there is a standard of perfection; perfect goodness, perfect beauty, perfect strength and perfect love. Against this standard, we will necessarily fall short and thus there is injustice. Or, we must accept that there is no standard for anything, including morality. With no standard then one is never justified in condemnation of anything since it cannot be measured against a standard."
I disagree. I don't believe there are only two options, for one perfect standard or nothing. As humans we are able reason how setting standards for our social groups benefited our survival and thus aiding others helped us in the long run versus just some survival of the fittest flawed notion. Sometimes the fittest group is the one that acts morally to each other regardless of the weak links within their social group which strengthened the whole and allowed some of the elderly or injured to pass on knowledge from one generation to the next instead of just capitalizing on the weak and taking their food and letting them die. This is where human morality originated as even the burried remains show that our ancient ancestors cared for those in their social groups and cave paintings show that knowledge was being passed down from one generation to the next more than 45,000 years ago. This fact just does not fit with the biblical version of earths history or the account of Adam which means there was no "first man" and no inherrited sin and thus no need for a savior or a ransom sacrafice. The entire bible is balanced on that one premise, the need for a redemption, so once that corner stone is removed the whole thing falls flat on its face.
Alias, Dyslexic wrote that, not Dave.
Facts, I say you're wrong and the proof is in this thread. I say justice includes the end of hunger. Someone else says it includes the end of abuse. A third person says it includes government financed automobile companies and a fourth cries for free markets. The pint is that humans cannot agree on what is just and so there cannot be a truly just world for all. Someone is going to be marginalized. The only possible way to eliminate injustice is to eliminate standards. It's simply a philosophical truth and I can't believe we even have to argue about it. It is self evident.
When you claim that there must not be a God or else there would be no injustice, you are hinging your argument on a contradiction of natural order, which includes your favorite theory of natural selection. If one object is not inferior to the other, how do you propose evolution occurs? If your values and my values are in conflict, how do we determine which becomes legislated and normalized? The answer is it won't and we can't.
"Or, we must accept that there is no standard for anything, including morality. With no standard then one is never justified in condemnation of anything since it cannot be measured against a standard."
Religious people find it very annoying that people don't need God to be good, as science has now incontestably proved.
For millennia, we've been brainwashed into believing that we needed the Almighty to redeem us from an essentially corrupt nature. Left to our own devices, people would quickly devolve into beasts, more violent, tactless, aggressive, and selfish, than we already are.
Today, we know that this isn't true. With the discovery of mirror neurons by Italian neuroscientist Giaccomo Rizzolatti in the 1990s, we now have physiological proof of why - and how - our species became hard-wired for goodness. Mirror neurons are miraculous cells in the brain whose sole purpose is to harmonize us with our environments. By reflecting the outside world inward, we actually become each other - a little bit; neurologically changed by what is happening around us. Mirror neurons are the reason that we have empathy and can feel each other's pain. It is because of mirror neurons that you blush when you see someone else humiliated, flinch when someone else is struck, and can't resist the urge to laugh when seeing a group struck with the giggles. (Indeed, people who test for "contagious yawning" tend to be more empathic.) These tiny mirrors are the key to most things noble and good inside us.
It is through mirror neurons - not God - that we redeem ourselves, achieve salvation, and are "reborn" in virtuous ways once co-opted by religions. Evolution knew what she was doing. A group of successful cooperators has a much higher chance of thriving than a population of selfish liars. In spite of what we read in the headlines, the ratio of bad to good deeds done on any given day across our planet holds at close to zero any day of the year. Although we are ethical works-in-progress, the vast majority of us are naturally positive creatures - meaning not harmful to our environments - most of the time in most of the ways that matter. And God has nothing to do with it.
Spirituality does but God doesn't. Evolutionary psychologists tell us that our brains are hard-wired with a five-toned moral organ that focuses on a quintet of ethical values - one of which is purity, or sacredness. In a world that can sometimes be disgusting, we evolved an upper tier of emotional longing - the aspiration for purity - to keep us balanced in this satyricon of carnal delights (where animality beckons and frequently wins). Our need for sacredness is part of our ancient survival apparatus, and manifests in what we call faith, the need to connect with that sacred dimension. This has been the primary purpose of religion, of course - to congregate people for the Greater Good - but God has been, in fact, the divine carrot. The important part was communion, a context in which to transcend ourselves, if only for an hour on Sundays. Without this ability "to turn off the Me and turn on the We," moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt tells us, our
species would still be wandering around as groups of nomads, unable to create a civilization.
Aside from mirror neurons, there's oxytocin, the molecule of connection (also known as the molecule of love). It's fascinating to learn that the vagus nerve produces more oxytocin when we witness virtuous behavior in others that makes us want to be better people ourselves. We are wired by nature to be elevated at the sight of other people's goodness, mirror neurons and oxytocin conspiring to improve the species. Miraculous though it is, this natural human phenomenon has nothing to do with theology.
"When you claim that there must not be a God or else there would be no injustice, you are hinging your argument on a contradiction of natural order, which includes your favorite theory of natural selection."
Is there natural order in Heaven? Do Angels have free will?
"If your values and my values are in conflict, how do we determine which becomes legislated and normalized? The answer is it won't and we can't." Total bull shlt. All you have to do is STOP TRYING TO LEGISLATE YOUR RELIGION and this whole conflict goes away. You keep your belief in invisible fairies out of your understanding that this is a secular government meant to govern everyone, even those with differing religious views. You say our values are in conflict and yet I believe murder to be wrong and bad for human society as is any violence against other humans and I would bet you likely feel the same way. We can agree on a basic set of laws that are for everyone, not just a few, not just the converted, but for everyone.
So why can't an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent god manage that? Doesn't care about children with AIDS or children starving, or isn't capable to correct, or doesn't exist?
Read C.S. Lewis The Problem of Pain.
Better yet, read this quote about suffering from Mother Teresa. It sums up the RCC's stance quite succinctly:
“Pain and suffering have come into your life, but remember pain, sorrow, suffering are but the kiss of Jesus – a sign that you have come so close to Him that He can kiss you.”
Christians claim an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent god yet can offer no evidence for that god and will twist into mental and verbal convolutions to avoid explaining the obvious contradictions.
well said @ISWT
It's called free will. God gave it to us as a gift out of unconditional love. That means no matter how rotten WE choose to be in how we use that gift, God can't take it back. God loves us enough to allow us to make our own choices, and that includes how we either build each other up or tear each other down. Nobody EVER said this world would ever be perfect, but we are its stewards.
Now, what are you going to do with your free will? Help those who do help the hungry, the sick and the suffering by volunteering your time and being supportive of charities of your choosing who counteract the world's problems you've identified, or spend your time arguing about religion with strangers and entertaining the illusion that we were supposed to have a perfect world?
"It's called free will. God gave it to us as a gift out of unconditional love."
If that was true then there would have been no need for a Christ...oh that's right your God doesn't have unconditional love which is why it had killed off man when it realized it screwed up it's original design. People like you are so delusional it's actually funny!
"It's called free will. God gave it to us as a gift out of unconditional love. That means no matter how rotten WE choose to be in how we use that gift, God can't take it back."
You forgot your God controls you through fear because if you do screw up you go to hell for eternity, that's not unconditional. LOL!
DD didn't say he wanted a perfect world. Your examples of a free beer and a chicken in every pot utopia isn't the same as expecting that our children are safe around our spiritual leaders, and that if one of them breaks the law, the police are called and the person is arrested.
As usual, Bill, you defend the indefensible by trying to create a diversion.
thanks Doobs. Nice to see someone else spots Bill's shell game. He'll always throw up smoke and mirrors to dodge the questions that show his religion to be foolishness.
" As usual, Bill, you defend the indefensible by trying to create a diversion. "
Standard operating procedure for Bill from day one.
Not really. You are simply making an argument for subjective morality. Some people see injustice in abuse, others might see it in hunger. The point is that we agree there is such a thing as justice and injustice. Without one, we could not know the other. If you want to argue about where the line is drawn, you've entered into a competiition with every other moralist who ever lived. But you cannot logically consider a world in which there is never any injustice for anyone anywhere. Shall we convene a quorum and meet in say Constantinople?
"But you cannot logically consider a world in which there is never any injustice for anyone anywhere."
OK, let's try it. Do you want to start with one of DD"s descriptions or do you have one of your own? Posit your just existence and let's see if it holds water
Post your proof of your god's existence and let's see if it holds water
Now that sounds about right. However, back to my question....why not?
"But you cannot logically consider a world in which there is never any injustice for anyone anywhere."
Explain why we cannot logically consider a world in which there is never any injustice for anyone anywhere.
Because there would be no death
Because there would be no death
@ Bill Deacon
Again, you are dodging the issue. DD didn't say he'd create utopia, he said he wouldn't allow children to be molested under his watch.
We have every right to expect that a religious organization be responsible for the protection of the children in its care, and the swift prosecution of anyone within it who breaks the law. That's not exactly asking for perfection. It allows that people will do bad things, but those people should be arrested, not quietly relocated.
well played Doobs. Victory to you.
Let me talk to panties Doobs, He's actually interesting. You don't seem to recognize that what you value as justice may not be what others do and therein lies the conflict.
Panties. First let me discourage you from perpetuation a condition of me arguing with myself. I'm willing to supply you the basics but at some point you'll have to supply your own arguments.
The reason there could be no death in a perfectly just world is because when we die, our loved ones are deprived of our consolation and comfort. When we experience loss, we perceive it as unjust. In the natural world, if everyone and everything were to live forever, the mechanism for regrowth would stagnate. So, birth and regeneration would have to cease. This would then be unjust to future generation. The cycle of life and death is unjust, but is is necessary.
When Doobs argues for the protection of children, he is making a righteous claim. But when Dog makes two mistakes. The first is he argues for conditional justice, which is in reality still injustice. The second is he implies that since there is injustice, there is no God. At this point, hopefully, I've shown that injustice, while a vexation to be overcome as best we can, is a fundamental component needed for the survival of the species.
If my explanation is inadequate, I suggest a course in philosophy, probably not from a secular humanist driven school.
@ Bill Deacon
"Let me talk to panties Doobs, He's actually interesting. You don't seem to recognize that what you value as justice may not be what others do and therein lies the conflict.'
You wanted someone to point out an example of your use of fallacies. Here's a nice ad hominem. Not as nasty as when you called me ignorant or when you lied about statements I've made, though.
There is no conflict in the expectation that if a person molests a child, they should be arrested, tried, and if found guilty, incarcerated. It is the law of the land, not my personal value judgement.
Stick to the issue, Bill. You keep trying to excuse the RCC's criminal activities by cloaking them in silly philosophical arguments.
And Bill Deacon runs away again.
Eyeing but one party and leaving alone all those rich elders and their sons of high society going to third world nations/countries seeking acts of sensualistic desires with enslaved "children" seems to have slipped thru your reason abilities...
what does that even mean?!
Another difference: you're real.
see Bill Deacon change the subject. Distraction is the only way that Christians know when faced by the questions that expose their religion as utter nonsense.
according to the bible, all he has to do is pray and his god and saints will protect him. why does he even need security from mere humans.
what a crock!
Because we have free will.
There's no free will if there's an omniscient and omnipotent god, they are mutually exclusive.
They are not, not sure what omnipotence has to do with anything. So an all powerful God is incapable of giving something?
As for omniscience– do you know who is going to win the 1986 world series? Then obviously you must have prevented bill Buckner's free will with your knowledge, right?
God creates people knowing exactly what they are going to do in life. It is the ultimate determinism, ergo you can not have an all powerful, all knowing personal god and free will together.
Then explain how your knowledge of any historical event influenced free will.
Granted I understand it is somewhat hard to grasp beings out side of time, but hopefully that helps.
I didn't create history.
And no, that ridiculous statement didn't help one bit.
"I didn't create history."
And that is where the problem comes in. It is all history, even the future. So we are back to you wont allow an all powerful God choose not to intervene at times. Which then negates being all powerful.
Could you be more coherent please?
Mike is assuming that god lives outside of time, so everything has already happened and there is no conflict.
I think you are just taking things in a very specific context to reach the conclusion you want. Just because god knows what you are going to do, how does that force you to do it?
God doesn't just know what I'm going to do, he created me knowing I'd do it. That is complete determinism,. Not only that, he then has the audacity to give me eternal punishment for doing what he created me to do. Thankfully I don't believe any of this tripe.
"I think you are just taking things in a very specific context to reach the conclusion you want"
That is what theists do.
Some of them.
@You're sorry Dave
God did not make you do anything.
He knew what you would do, but it was still your choice to do it.
Raise a child, you'll understand.
You can only have free will if you can do something that god didn't know you were going to do. How can you have free will if god made you knowing what decisions you were going to make in life, and god can't be wrong? At best you have the illusion of free will.
Where is protection promised in the Bible?
I have read, Acts 14:19, 20:29,John 15:18-21, Matthew 5:43-45, 2 Timothy 3:12, 1Peter 3:16-17, Revelation 1,
I have not come across this protection you speak of.
Ten Bible Verses About God's Protection
1 Peter 5:6-7- Mighty hand of God
Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you at the proper time, casting all your anxiety upon Him, because He cares for you.
Romans 8:28 – All things work together for good!
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.
Matthew 10:29-30 – God knows us well
"Are not two sparrows sold for a cent? And yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
Ephesians 6:11-13 – Armor of God
Put on the full armor of God, that you may be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore, take up the full armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm.
Psalm 27:1-3 – Jesus is the defense of our lives
The LORD is my light and my salvation; Whom shall I fear? The LORD is the defense of my life; Whom shall I dread? When evildoers came upon me to devour my flesh, My adversaries and my enemies, they stumbled and fell. Though a host encamp against me, My heart will not fear; Though war arise against me, In spite of this I shall be confident.
Psalm 55:22 – God will sustain you
Cast your burden upon the LORD, and He will sustain you; He will never allow the righteous to be shaken.
Psalm 62:5-8 – Hope in Him
My soul, wait in silence for God only, For my hope is from Him. He only is my rock and my salvation, My stronghold; I shall not be shaken. On God my salvation and my glory rest; The rock of my strength, my refuge is in God. Trust in Him at all times, O people; Pour out your heart before Him; God is a refuge for us. Selah.
With all that promised protection, shouldn't he get rid of his security detail?
I'm still waiting for you to answer my question about Mother Teresa, btw. Unless you posted one and I can't find it because of the new format. If that's the case, could you repeat it here, please?
Sorry Bill, if you really are bill, I don't see it
–1 Peter 5:6-7- Mighty hand of God
Don't see protection I see exalt you at the proper time,
–Romans 8:28 – All things work together for good!
Good, again is not protection see Geneses 37-42
–Matthew 10:29-30 – God knows us well
Yes and amen, but knowledge is not protection
–Ephesians 6:11-13 – Armor of God
This one is interesting and does not go to the OP original objection. As stated the evil day is coming, resist it not I will protect you from it
Psalm, agian this goes to God is enough, not God will protect you from harm
I would also add to my list
The book of Job and
Sorry that you can't see it Mike. Perhaps the pope is offering an object lesson. By all accounts he is disengaged from anxiety about his security. He is relating openly to crowds wherever he goes. I would say he has cast his anxiety upon the Lord. That doesn't mean that something won't happen to him. It just means he trust that God's purpose will persevere.
I see you failed to respond to my question, again. I'm not surprised.
Ok I see your point about not worrying and having angst and agree with that. But responding to the OP "WHY doesn't God protect him" I think we agree that he is not protected from harm. Just promised eternity which far surpasses any worldly worry.
So who in that mostly Catholic nation is trying to kill him?
Do you think Catholics are monolithic?
I guess that god isnt protecting the pope when he's not in Italy. Why would the pope need Swiss guards?
Where is protection promised in the Bible?
I have read, Acts 14:19, 20:29,John 15:18-21, Matthew 5:43-45, 2 Timothy 3:12, 1Peter 3:16-17, Revelation 1,
I have not come across this protection you speak of?
I don't know which of the 4 popemobile stories I should read. I chose this one. It was not a wise choice.
It's okay. Just go back to batting mice and getting scratched behind the ears, and you'll feel right as rain in no time.
Wasn't this reported Monday?