Has the Creator of the Universe Designed the Universe to Deceive Most of Mankind?

If we conclude to most men having one, or several, or many false beliefs over a long time period we may conclude most of mankind has been deceived by the universe and thereby in some manner the universe was created for men to be deceived. If we examine say theism, we note several major theistic religions with broadly competing truth claims, and within the same theistic religion, we find many competing denominations with diverse beliefs. For example, the monotheism of Christianity is diverse from the monotheism of Islam and that of Judaism. And within those three religions, there are many denominations with conflicting truth claims. 

If one group of men in any of these denominations of the monotheistic religions has the truth, then all other men have been deceived, including all men who are not included in any monotheistic religion. Alternatively, there are no true denominations as all may be false, and other men in another belief system may have the truth and then all men in monotheistic religions have been deceived. If so most men have been deceived.

As the major belief systems of the world have existed for many centuries, there is strong evidence that most men have been deceived for long time periods. If the universe has been created, the creator has then in some manner permitted the universe to exist and thereby deceive many men. If the Christian God made the universe, He has done so, knowing that most men will be deceived by the universe. As Christianity teaches that God cannot sin, then the creation of the universe is not itself the cause of sin, but an occasion for God to draw a good out of the evil. 

Therefore the deception of most men is occasioned by God for a large defect of deception as an occasion for a greater good which can be caused by only God alone. One such good may be the large deception permits many men to have an excuse for the many sins committed out of ignorance and thereby reduce man's culpability at the final judgment.

The Theism - Atheism Question as a Question of Two fearful Outcomes.

If atheism is true then man is all alone in the universe which is full of suffering and death. Such a universe is a fearful place for man to exist and die, along with the prospect that human life is ultimately futile. Such an existence is in accord with fear of existing for no reason without relief from the prospect of suffering and death and the accompanying injustices in the world.

If theism is true and God exists, man lives along with a giant God who watches our every move and choses to remain silent and largely remains hidden from most or many men. Such a God is beyond the control of men and cannot be stopped from acting. Men should then live in fear of the God who owns the universe and may justly judge man at any time.

Either way, there is good reason for man to fear if God does or does not exist.

The History of Atheism and Theism Points to the Catholic Doctrine of Original Sin.

Atheism says there is no god and yet atheism has many unresolvable problems and contradictions. One such contradiction is - Atheism says God, which is existence, does not exist.

Theism says there is a god, or gods. The multiple versions of theism make the many versions of theism false with only one version of theism true. 

The many errors on the issue of atheism and theism indicate that man collectively has trouble in knowing the truth concerning the existence of God. Such a problem is strong evidence for original sin which teaches that man has a wound of ignorance concerning the things of God and finds it difficult to know the truth and live the truth.

The Multiple Mysteries of Human Nature.

Human nature contains several mysteries or secrets concerning the existence and purpose of the human race. 

1) If man is composed of an immortal soul and a body and when man dies, he will continue to exist forever without a body and then man's existence is dominated as a life of a pure spirit. Such a life is outside sequential time as a measure of accidental change of bodies. Therefore the separated soul continues to live in time similar to that of the angels, called aeveternity, or if the soul sees God face to face, then eternity. The continued existence of the man without a body is a mystery concerning 1) the current union of body and soul and 2) the ongoing life of man with a separation of body and soul. 

2) If man is composed of an immortal soul and a body and when man dies he will continue to exist for a time without a body until the general resurrection. The general resurrection of man to restore man back to his integral nature is a mystery of the ongoing existence of man who is dependent upon the power and wisdom of God to cause the reunion of body and soul. Man then has his life here and now, then dies and lives another life in the spirit realm, and then lives a third life when reunited as body and soul. Each state of life is then a mystery in itself and a mystery in relation to the other states of life.

3) If man is only a material substance,  man ceases to exist at death and man's existence is only a temporal event without any permanent and lasting value. The existence of man and the universe is then a mystery of futility, whilst the universe continues to exist. All things then exist for no reason, when in fact if nothing existed, the negation would also serve the same futile purpose. The futile universe of the materialist is a universe with the equivalent value of a pure negation of all things. Such a universe containing the materialist man is a mystery.

The entire big picture of man as a creature with incomplete substantial parts of body and soul is also a mystery, for the entire show need not exist apart from the will of God that causes all things to exist and God's providence that causes all events to occur in accord with His plan.

Economics as Strong Evidence for the Existence of God.

Economic theory teaches that man has an infinite appetite, and yet man exists in a world of finite resources. The economic theory is stated to account for the condition of man that seems to be a contradiction. For man wants everything, but can only ever have so much. Such an economic theory is strong evidence for God, for only God is the infinite good who can satisfy man's natural appetite for the infinite good.

Economic theory is strong evidence for the existence of God.

The Modern Problem of Divorce Caused by the Wound of Original Sin and the Prior Denial of the True Spouse.

Modernity is marked by the proliferation of divorce, caused by unhappiness between the spouses. The two spouses that once loved each other, separated after love is lost. The loss of love between the spouses is caused in part through the wound of original sin, which causes men and women to seek fulfilment in a spouse as the object of happiness. But by seeking for the spouse that makes one happy, the man or woman has assumed a need for a spouse that is not proved for within the single human person. For example, the man seeks for a woman, for the man sees something lacking in himself and something fulfilling in the woman. By the man seeing something lacking in himself is assuming that lack can best be provided for through the woman. And yet the woman is only a human spouse of finite good, and even if a perfect woman, she cannot ever fill the void existing within the man.

The secular man, living in the modern age assumes there is no other spouse he can engage other than a human spouse, as the men then enters into marriage without any expectation for engagement from any other source of fulfilment than the female spouse. And when the female spouse fails to deliver the legitimate needs of the man (and vice versa), the man begins to move away from the female and the female away from the male spouse. Such a motion of spouses away from each other is in part caused by the assumption that there is no other spouse in the secular based marriage.

And yet divine revelation has provided a great truth that God is the truth spouse of all men and woman and is always present within every marriage. If the assumption that there is only one human spouse for the modern man is a false assumption, corrected by the truth of the existence of the divine spouse, modern marriages have a chance to survive and produce lasting fulfilment for both spouses. For the divine spouse will always act to heal and provide peace between the spouses whilst causing a release of pressure on the spouses to provide something that cannot be provided - fulfilment as through the infinite goodness of God.

In short, the assumption that God is irrelevant to modern secular marriages is an assumption based upon the wound of ignorance caused by original sin. Original sin is then a major contributor to the break up of many modern marriages, along with the consequent actual sins of the spouses against each other.

An Irony of Unbelief which Affirms Original Sin in Practice but Denies Original Sin in Theory.

The man who is an unbeliever does not believe there is a God, and does not believe Jesus was God, nor does he believe the Catholic church is the one true church instituted by God. But according to the Catholic faith, all men suffer from the wound of ignorance which entails an ignorance of God and God's will for mankind. By the unbeliever not believing in God and God's will as manifested through the Catholic church, the unbeliever is participating in the disorder of original sin as known and taught by God through the Catholic church. 

By participating in the consequences of original sin, the unbeliever is acting in accordance with the truth of the Catholic church which says the following about man, which are all true of unbelievers.

1) Man is ignorant of who God is and what God wants from man.

2) Man is prone to sin and prone to love creatures more than God.

3) Man is prone to suffering and death.

4) Man is prone to unbelief.

The above truths of unbelievers provide the unbeliever with an excuse with regard to not believing in the Catholic faith whilst the unbeliever denies one or more of the truths of the Catholic faith. Because the Catholic faith is the true faith, the existence of many unbelievers is expected and occurs on a regular basis. 

The irony of unbelief is the unbeliever denies the very reality which causes him to be an unbeliever, by denying the wounds of original sin, whilst living with those same wounds on a daily basis. Consequent to the irony, original sin is both a cause for belief as evidence for the one true faith, and a cause for unbelief as an intrinsic wound in all men.

The Problem of Atheism's Negation as the Creator God of Atheism.

Atheism denies the existence of God. And consequently, some atheists hold that the universe came into existence by itself as from nothing. As nothing is a negation of being, a negation is the cause of the universe for the atheist. Contrarily, the theist thinks God, which is infinite being caused the universe to come into existence. Therefore the atheist has equated a negation of being with the infinite being of God. Consequently, the god of atheism is a negation in opposition to an infinite being of theism, but which acts with the same power as an infinite being of theism.

Atheism says a negation created the universe, whilst also holding the position that the infinite being did not create a universe.

The Problem of Atheism's Accounting for Creatures as through the Existence of More Creatures.

Some atheists hold to the existence of a series of creatures to account for the existence of another creature, say a tree stump. For the tree stump exists, but does not necessarily exist and may in fact not exist at all. The atheist is then assuming an insufficiency in the tree stump, and provides a cause for the insufficiency in the tree stump as through other creatures. But because the insufficiency is intrinsic to the nature of creatures, more creatures will never provide a solution to the problem of the insufficiency in creatures, but will only ever make the problem worse. For an empty bucket that must be filled with water cannot be filled with anything else than water. So too a creature that has a lack of an account of being, cannot have an account of being from another creature as the source of the lack of being. For just as only water can provide for the lack of water in the bucket, only being can provide for the lack of being in the creature. 

The being that causes the being of a creature is God and never another creature. For a creature cannot cause being as the being of another creature, but can only act as an extrinsic efficient cause of another creature.

The Problem of Atheism's Inferred God and the Consequent Falsity of Atheism.

The atheist claims there is no god and yet atheism always concludes to theism. For if the atheist claims naturalism, naturalism is the supreme being and therefore god. If naturalism is denied and natures exist as through an infinite regress of causes, the causes are god. If the series is denied the absurdity of natures disconnected from any explanation is god. If the absurdity is denied, the atheist is god. If the atheist is denied, the denial of god by the atheist is god. If the denial of the divinity of the denial is denied, the denial is god and so on. Whenever an atheist asserts or denies anything, a god is always inferred and atheism is always false.

The Problem of the Generation of Children as a Miraculous Act of God Contrary to the Enlightenment's Denial of Miracles.

The person is defined philosophically as -  An act of being which is incommunicable. The person exists and is, therefore, an act of being. For being is to exist. Furthermore, the person is incommunicable, for a person owns everything which it has. For example, Peter owns his arms, legs, eye, heart, thoughts, willing and actions. Each of these parts can be communicated to another. Such as an idea. Peter can have an idea, which is known to him and is, therefore, Peter's idea. Peter can then also express the idea to another and thereby communicates the idea to another. Likewise, Peter can give every other part of himself to another. For example, Peter can give all of his actions to another as to an employer.

However, there is something Peter cannot communicate, or give to another. That which cannot be communicated to another is Peter's person. Peter is the name we give to the person, which is that which cannot be given to another. When Peter gives, it is Peter, and not another person that gives. Peter then cannot give something of himself that is Peter, for there is not a person, prior to the person of Peter, by which Peter can be given to another. Peter, then is the name given to the personhood of the rational substance, which is fundamentally incommunicable.

Also, anything the person owns cannot become and thereby communicate the essence of the person to any of the attributes of the person. Peter's hand cannot become the person of Peter, nor can any part of Peter become the person of Peter. For parts of Peter are parts which participate in the Person of Peter as the owner of all of the parts. The parts are then always ontologically subject and subordinated to the ontological reality of the person, that is Peter. The being of the person is then ontologically prior to and of a distinct nature to the being of all of the parts which are subject to the person. Peter as a person has the being of the person, which is ontologically prior to the being of Peter's hand, arm, leg, and his soul.

If we posit Peter was generated as the son of James and Sally, they act as Peter's parents to cause Peter's body through conception, and generation. However, because the person of Peter is not Peter's body, but rather, a being that owns Peter's body, the person of Peter is not caused by Peter's parents. For the parents are only physical causes of Peter's body and cannot be ontological causes of the existence of Peter's body, or soul, or Peter's person. All the being of Peter is caused by being itself, which is God, who is the universal cause of all creatures being.

But the being of Peter's person is a being that is caused by God as through an act of divine power to change the person of Peter as a potential person into an actual person as through a divine act of eduction. But for the divine power to act to cause Peter's person, God must act as the principal cause to raise the potency of matter to the act of being of the person. But as the act to be of the person is a special being, distinct from the being of Peter's body and soul, the being of the person is a very special being which -

1) owns the being and all physical attributes of Peter.

2) is a being that is unique and cannot be repeated, for the person is incommunicable.

As the being of the person is unique, the divine act to cause the being of the person, must also be co-natural to the uniqueness of the act of the person. Such as divine act may well be a miracle, whereby God as the principal agent acts with secondary causes, such as Peter's being of his body and soul, and the physical causes of Peters body to cause the being of Peter's person. For a miracle is a divine act whereby the obediential potency of the secondary cause is used by the principal cause to raise the secondary cause to act beyond its natural power. As Peter's being of his soul and body all have natural acts which cannot cause the being of the person, the divine act to actualise the obediential potency within Peter's body and soul uses Peter's body and soul as secondary causes to enact the being of the person of Peter.

In short, because the being of the person cannot be caused by Peter's body, or soul, or the being of Peter, the divine act within Peter to cause the being of Peter's person is an act beyond the nature of Peter's attributes. Such a divine act is equivalent to a miracle to cause the existence of the personhood of every child ever born as a divine act to actualise and obediential potency within the human generation process.

Now if we contrast the above argument of the person as caused by a miraculous power of God, to the enlightenment philosophy of David Hume, we note Hume denied the existence of miracles, whilst at the same time having the existence of his own person as caused through a divine miracle. Consequently, whenever a philosopher denies the existence of miracles he must also deny the proper account of the existence of the human person as a product of a divine, miraculous act. As the enlightenment, in general, denies the existence of miracles, the enlightenment has no proper account for the existence of human persons and is thereby an inhuman philosophy.

Some Comment on the Multiple Mysteries Associated with Damnation and Glorification.

The damned are those who have died in the state of mortal sin. And mortal sin is to suffer the loss of the theological virtue of charity. To have no charity within the soul is to love a creature more than God, who is goodness itself. Or, in other words, damnation is to love a creature more than the saviour. But for the damned to love a creature more than the saviour, requires that the saviour not act to save the sinner from mortal sin before the sinner's death. As the saviour has an infinite power and can save all mankind, any damned are permitted to be damned by the saviour who permits the sinner to continue in mortal sin until death. The damned are in hell because - 

1) The damned have committed mortal sin by their own free will and lost the virtue of charity.

2) The damned are permitted by the divine saviour to remain in mortal sin until death.

Consequently, the damned are in hell in part, because the divine saviour has chosen not to save the sinner by infusing grace into the soul of the man in the state of mortal sin.

The glorified are in heaven because they died in the state of sanctifying grace. In other words, the saviour caused grace to be infused into the souls of men who were previously in a state of original or mortal sin. Consequently, the glorified are in heaven in part, because the divine saviour chose to save the sinner by infusing grace into the soul of the men before death and maintaining men in the state of grace until death.

The reprobate are damned by the consequent permissive will of the saviour to permit the evil of mortal sin to continue unto the death of the sinner. The saints are also glorified by either the antecedent will whereby the saviour wills the salvation of all men prior to mortal sin committed my sinners, or the consequent active will of the saviour, whereby the saviour acts to infuse grace into the sinners soul after mortal sin and preserve the regenerated man in the state of grace unto death . 

As the consequent permissive and active will of the saviour is always in accord with the divine wisdom, the will to permit mortal sin and damnation and the will to act to save and glorify are both in accord with the divine wisdom. Therefore the divine wisdom produces the following diverse outcomes in human history -

1) God actively wills all men to be saved.

2) God permissively wills that some men freely sin and are damned. By God permitting the damnation of some men, God does not actively will to save some men after committing mortal sin.

3) God actively wills that some men either stay in the state of grace after baptismal regeneration or are restored to the state of grace after mortal sin, before death.

Points 1)-3) are mysteries in themselves and mysteries in relation to the other mysteries, which involve God applying the divine power in different ways to different, individual men. Consequently, there are the following mysteries involved in damnation and glorification -

1) God's universal willing the salvation of all men.

2) God's consequent permissive will with regard to permitting some men to commit mortal sin.

3) God's consequent active will with regard to saving some men after committing mortal sin.

4) 1) in relation to 2)

5) 1) in relation to 3)

6) 2) in relation to 3)

7) 1, 2 and 3 in relation to divine wisdom.

7) 1, 2, 3 in relation to the free will of men and divine wisdom.

1) involves the mystery of God's universal love for all men to will that all men be placed into the state of grace and thereby be saved. Point 2) involves the mystery of God permitting sin and permitting damnation, contrary to point 1). For if some men are damned, then damnation occurs contrary to Gods universal active antecedent will to save all men.

Point 3) involves the mystery of God permitting sin and then acting to save some men from sin, contrary to 1) and 2). For God is the prime mover and can prevent men from entering into temptation and thereby prevent men from participating in an occasion of sin. Also, God does save men after sin, contrary to His permissive will to allow other sinners to be damned.

The two mutually exclusive outcomes of damnation and glorification are both in accord with the multiple mysteries of God's will associated with divine wisdom and men freely choosing to sin, or freely choosing to practice virtue. The damned are in hell, in part because they have sinned and have not been saved by the saviour through an act of grace. The glorified are in heaven because the saviour has acted to save through grace, and the elect have acted with grace to merit eternal life.

The human drama is jam packed with divine mysteries.