Copernic

RJS, that's not very Christian of you.

ManM

This is what I tried to get across earlier in the thread.

K

RJS and ManM:

Even if that were the case, God created people that He knew would consider Heaven to be Hell and He still created them while condemning them to an eternity of suffering in Heaven. Why did He knowingly create creatures with those faults? Do animals live for all eternity or just humans? If animals cease to exist when they, why wouldn't God just do the same to the humans who didn't want to be in Heaven?

southernhybrid

No silly. That is not the atheist view. The atheist view is that there is no god but sometimes we humor Xians and pretend that there is a god like the Xian god just for the sake of argument. He is a very dreadful entity if we take his reputation for revenge and punishment seriously.

What many theists don't seem to understand is that many if not most atheists were once theists and very carefully came to the conclusion that the only gods that exist are the ones created by human mythology. God exists only in the mind. We were not created in his image but he in our image. It seems pretty obvious yet tradition can be very hard to overcome for many people, so religion remains strong.

The concept of worship seems pretty silly to me in modern society. Worship sounds like some pagan ritual offered to the sun god. If there were a god and if we were made in his image, wouldn't the highest degree of worship simply mean treating our fellow humans and other parts of creation with the utmost compasssion and consideration? Wouldn't good works be the ultimate worship of a good and loving god? Wouldn't belief be minor, even insignificant, as long as humanitarian works were present?

If there were a benevolent god, he would never punish his favorite species by sending them to be tortured eternally. Only sociopaths and psychopaths in human society treat others that way. Are you saying that the Xian god is a sociopath?

sciteach

K yours is the real question that even we christians struggle with. Do you choose to have kids even if there is a chance that he will use his free will to reject a relationship with you? Most parents I know willingly took the risk, and why should God be any different? Just because he knows the beginning from the end (he is outside time) doesnt negate our real choices. Hell is the natural consequence of a life chosen to be lived on your own terms, independent of any one elses views, and is the ultimate in being left on your own. Heaven is for those who choose to live in communion with the creator. Unless you satisfy Gods justice by giving Him a reason to make you able to bear His presence (ie accept His Son, jesus), you could not bear to stand in His presence and would prefer Hell, bad as it is.

K

sciteach:

If I knew that my children would become the next Hitler I would certainly avoid having them. If I knew for sure they'd reject me, I would still have them. I wouldn't do anything to try and punish them for that rejection. I knew before I had them that they would reject me. God's knowing the future would definitely put the burden of responsibility on Him.

The question still remains as to why God would not simply allow those who rejected Him to cease existing. Why would He feel the need to have them suffer an eternal torment - especially since He knew before creating them that the would be sentenced to eternal torment. That's just cruel.

Silent Acorns

This is perhaps the stangest rationalization of hell I have ever heard. God is so wonderful that it hurts to be with Him? It hurts so much that some would rather suffer in Hell than suffer in Heaven? And the only way to withstand His presence is by blindly believing in the superstitious ramblings of an ancient cult?

I'm sorry, but I can't tell the difference between your "God" and the traditional "Satan".

Think of ot this way:

Unless you satisfy Satan's injustice by giving him a reason to make you able to bear his presence (i.e. embrace his unholy power), you could not bear to stand in his presence and would prefer heaven.

Autonemesis

Big. Honking. Strawman.

Whoever said non-theists do or decide anything "independent of anyone elses views"? So far, only you and other Christians have asserted that atheists "go it alone" in this manner. Declining to considering theist ideas is not the same as not considering "any one elses views". It just means we don't consider scripture to have any special status when it comes to ethical discussions. And since God has not seen fit to weigh in to these debates himself, his opinion is moot by way of being absent.

Vanderzyden

K,

When exploring God's relationship to humans, it is necessary that you consider that humans possess free agency.

Here is your revised argument:

The result is indeed nearly the same. Indeed, your substitution does not make the argument any stronger. I will repeat what I wrote in response to the first version of your argument:

In creating humans, he makes them perfect. He gives them the ability to love, but this ability is not possible without the attendant ability to CHOOSE. To love something is to choose to do so. Love is not "programmable"--it must be freely done. Of course, a choice necessarily entails alternatives. This is what is meant by free-will. We may choose to do what is good, or what is evil. Note: Should you deny the notion of free-will you must (1) reconcile this with the general human experience, and (2) resolve the contradiction with premise A, which states that God makes at least one choice (why would this preclude him from creating other beings who may also choose?)

Now, If we admit that humans have faults, then we must admit that humans are imperfect. From this, we may directly infer a potential state of perfection. In turn, we then recognize that the Creator must create with intention. The humans he created were meant to fulfill a purpose. The good for humans is that which fulfills our intended purpose. Evil is the opposite. Human faults result from choices that are evil (non-good). Every human has chosen, at various times in their lives, to do what is not good for them.

So, your conclusions do not follow. With prior knowledge, God designed humans to fulfill a purpose, but gave them the ability to choose. Humanity necessarily entails free will. Humans have decided in favor of the non-good (non-God). Their faults are the result.

Let me elaborate further. Humans have faults, but that is because they chose to have them. Their choice is to do evil instead of good. Therefore, it does NOT follow that God is the cause of our faults. Free agency is the insurmountable barrier that so far prevents anyone from demonstrating that God is the author of evil.

Note: If you will say that free agency is a fault, then you must explain why.


Vanderzyden

Vanderzyden

So, are you saying that you have power over life and death?

No, that is surely not what you mean. You didn't create your child. You took advantage of an amazingly complex and wonderful "system" of procreation. This is not creation from nothing. This is not instantiation from the non-natural to the natural. Furthermore, you had no say in the time or place of your birth. Similarly, you will not be able to prevent your death.

Anyway, if you are a genuine parent, then you do make demands of your children. It's called respect. You insist that they do what you tell them, if only for their own welfare. This respect is analogous to worship. When we map this analogy to the Creator, we must remember that he has full power over life and death. He made the rules that govern our existence. At minimum, he deserves worship on that basis.

Vanderzyden

[ October 07, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]</p>