Child sacrifice in America dealt with by heaven

[dad]

An omnipotent god could have created humans with the free will to sin, but with no proclivity to sin. So we wouldn’t be robots, and we wouldn’t sin.

Since the god you believe in obviously didn’t do that, then you have to conclude that this god desires humans to sin more than creating humans that don’t.

That’s not my definition of “loving”...

So no ability to choose between good and evil, only an ability to choose within good things is what you envision as loving. That sounds more like a neutered cat to me. Either we are alive and real and actually need to face tough choices, or we aren't. We were created, after all in His image, and He faced the tough choices. Why shouldn't we? We could have taken the easy way out back in the garden. But man chose the tough road. The long way home.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

On well, once more unto the breach and all that...

If we are free then we are not robots. If He did the choosing for us, we would be.

This is a false dichotomy. God has been intervening in human affairs without "violating free will" for millenia. He has spoken to people, performed miracles, intervened directly on countless occasions.

Paul had likely been praying and seeking. So God answered.

Nonsense. Saul wasn't unsure what to do at all. He had no doubts about his mission to stamp out Christians until Jesus sent him a vision. Did that interfere with his free will or turn him into a robot? Not at all. Saul was doing the wrong thing, and God spoke to him, telling him to act differently.

God only uses sinners. There are no other kind of saints! Paul repented. Hitler didn't.

Paul only repented after God spoke to him. Before that, he was a Christian hunter, and proud of it. Indeed, Paul and Hitler were not so different. Both were intent on stamping out impure people who were a threat to their own, and both were quite sure they were right. And yet God - or Jesus, one part of the Trinity - saw nothing wrong with simply appearing to him and telling him what to do.

He is coming back again to rule soon. Get saved right away!

Perhaps you can help us by posting persuasive arguments? Threats should not be necessary. You might say it's just a warning, but regardless you wouldn't need it if you could make your case.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

So no ability to choose between good and evil, only an ability to choose within good things is what you envision as loving. That sounds more like a neutered cat to me

So in heaven, you will be like a neutered cat? Since, in heaven, presumably nobody will be able to sin, right? Of course, that means their free will must have been removed.

Or, they do have the ability to sin, but nobody - nobody ever, in the whole eternal existence of heaven, lasting for trillions of years, then an infinity more - will ever, ever use their free will to do anything other than good?

And, if it is possible for us to exist in a state in which we only ever choose good and still have free will, then why didn't God create us like that first? Oh, he did, with Adam and Eve, but then something went wrong? So how can you guarantee something won't go wrong again?

Imagine if we got to heaven, and found it was just like Earth, because as soon as people arrived in their new Eden they found they were still...people.

This is a problem that has bedevilled apologists since heaven was first proposed, but I am sure you have the answer to it.

 

[dad]

This is a false dichotomy. God has been intervening in human affairs without "violating free will" for millenia. He has spoken to people, performed miracles, intervened directly on countless occasions.

If we knock, and seek and ask, yes He opens and answers and acts. That is because we used our will to ask!

Now in some cases, He did intervene to a degree such as the flood, and Sodom and Gomorrah. Those folks had used their will and chose also! They chose to reject Him.

Nonsense. Saul wasn't unsure what to do at all. He had no doubts about his mission to stamp out Christians until Jesus sent him a vision. Did that interfere with his free will or turn him into a robot? Not at all. Saul was doing the wrong thing, and God spoke to him, telling him to act differently.

You read his mind and heart? The bible lays it out clearly that God answers prayer and the hungry heart. I have no doubt Saul was praying and God answered.

Paul only repented after God spoke to him. Before that, he was a Christian hunter, and proud of it. Indeed, Paul and Hitler were not so different. Both were intent on stamping out impure people who were a threat to their own, and both were quite sure they were right. And yet God - or Jesus, one part of the Trinity - saw nothing wrong with simply appearing to him and telling him what to do.

Before what? How do we know what was going on in Saul's heart and how he prayed or not or if he was starting to see through the religious baloney? God made it clear if we call He will answer. The action of Him answering Saul tells me that Saul had cried out in his heart. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction sort of thing. If I see the reaction, I know there was some action. Elementary.

 

[Rajni]

He respects our choice. He is not like a rapist that forces women. He is more like a gentle shepherd that asks us to follow.

No one said He was.

Now, can you answer my question: God is free -- is He a robot?

Paul had likely been praying and seeking. So God answered.

Pure speculation.

God only uses sinners. There are no other kind of saints! Paul repented. Hitler didn't.

More speculation (not that there's anything wrong with that).

He was concerned enough to die for us to make a way to escape the evil. You seem to want Him to force everyone.

God has already enforced things without our vote as it is,
so why wouldn't he ordain unborn babies' well-being (if,
indeed, that well-being is truly in any real jeopardy)?

Women prone to desiring to kill babies have free will just as mass murders do for the moment. When He steps in, He will not allow that sort of thing any more, and no one except the saved will even be on earth any more. But remember there is a lot of good also here on earth. Many people are learning things, and changing, and being worked on from the inside out. Many people will still make the choice to receive His salvation. If He had stepped in before I was born, for example, I never would have gotten the chance or choice. If God had stepped in to stop Hitler I would not be here..nor untold millions of other believers.

I agree that, ultimately, it's all good. In fact, the narrative
I subscribe to is even better news than the "good" news is
said to be, but that's for another thread.

However, this doesn't negate the fact that God has, apparently,
"forced" some people to be unable to conceive. So my question
still stands: why would it all of a sudden be called a violation
of "free will" if the wombs that were rendered sterile were
the same ones belonging to abortion-prone women?

He is coming back again to rule soon. Get saved right away!

This doesn't answer my question, and been-there-done-that.

 

[Rajni]

So no ability to choose between good and evil, only an ability to choose within good things is what you envision as loving. That sounds more like a neutered cat to me. Either we are alive and real and actually need to face tough choices, or we aren't. We were created, after all in His image, and He faced the tough choices. Why shouldn't we? We could have taken the easy way out back in the garden. But man chose the tough road. The long way home.

So God is akin to a neutered cat?

 

[dad]

So God is akin to a neutered cat?

Obviously that reference was to people that would have no real ability to choose good and evil. Obviously also you are not here to debate or reason. Cheers

 

[ToddNotTodd]

So no ability to choose between good and evil, only an ability to choose within good things is what you envision as loving.

If you had read carefully, you would see that’s not what I said at all. I said we could have the choice to do evil, but never decide to do evil.

That sounds more like a neutered cat to me. Either we are alive and real and actually need to face tough choices, or we aren't.

Like I’ve already said, we could have been made so that in situations where there is a “tough choice”, we always make the free will choice to do good. If fact, you probably already do this.

For example, I don’t know about you, but in situations where I have the opportunity to molest a child, I never ever do so. The idea to do this evil is abhorrent to me to my core. Would you say I’m a “neutered” cat just because in those situations I’ll never ever choose to take the evil option? If so, ask any molested child if they’d rather live in a rich tapestry of existence that includes child molestation, or in a world full of “neutered cats” who decide never to molest children...

 

[dad]

If you had read carefully, you would see that’s not what I said at all. I said we could have the choice to do evil, but never actually do evil.



Like I’ve already said, we could have been made so that in situations where there is a “tough choice”, we always make the free will choice to do good. If fact, you probably already do this.

So no real free will then is what you are saying. Kinda like free will but no real ability to chose evil.

For example, I don’t know about you, but in situations where I have the opportunity to molest a child, I never ever do so. The idea to do this evil is abhorrent to me to my core. Would you say I’m a “neutered” cat just because in those situations I’ll never ever choose to take the evil option?

No. If you chose not to sacrifice your neighbor's kid, or stab him in the eye with a fork, you are choosing not to give in to absolute wickedness and evil. You still had a choice.

If so, ask any molested child if they’d rather live in a rich tapestry of existence that includes child molestation, or in a world full of “neutered cats” who decide never to molest children...

Ask Syrians if they liked having their country bombed to rubble. Naturally most of us would prefer not to be living under extreme wickedness. However, if I ask a child that had a tough upbringing if they would rather not be alive in this world, I think most of them would say that they would chose life despite the horrors that also exist in the world.

Creation cries out to be delivered, and I would think never so loudly as in these darkening days of the end.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

So no real free will then is what you are saying. Kinda like free will but no real ability to chose evil.

For the third time no.

If you have the opportunity in your lifetime to molest a child, and never make the choice to do so, did you have free will?

If you say yes, then you see an example where you clearly have free will, but never choose the evil option. An omnipotent god could have created all humans with this trait for all situations.

If you say no, then you’re admitting that your god created us without free will, which invalidates your argument, and also shows that the god you believe in isn’t omnibenevolent.

So which is it?

 

[dad]

For the third time no.

If you have the opportunity in your lifetime to molest a child, and never make the choice to do so, did you have free will?

Yes.

If you say yes, then you see an example where you clearly have free will, but never choose the evil option. An omnipotent god could have created all humans with this trait for all situations.

No. Free will is free will. Free will with no ability to choose is something else. There is no being a little pregnant either a woman is or not. There is n such thing as sort of good sin. Jesus had to die to free us from it. It is not a matter of us freeing ourselves by being sort of good or at least not overt monsters. Why question how God created us? Would He not know what He was doing? I have to assume He knew better than you.

If you say no, then you’re admitting that your god created us without free will, which invalidates your argument, and also shows that the god you believe in isn’t omnibenevolent.

So which is it?

I don't think that He should have created us with half baked pretend free will. It's the real deal.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

If we knock, and seek and ask, yes He opens and answers and acts. That is because we used our will to ask!

and

Now in some cases, He did intervene to a degree such as the flood, and Sodom and Gomorrah. Those folks had used their will and chose also! They chose to reject Him.

Fine. So God is willing to intervene in human affairs if people ask him to. And he's also willing to intervene in human affairs if people don't want him to. Which brings us back to the point we've all been making: why doesn't God do something about abortions if he doesn't like them? By your own admission, there's nothing stopping God from doing something, should he so desire.

You read his mind and heart? The bible lays it out clearly that God answers prayer and the hungry heart. I have no doubt Saul was praying and God answered.

Hmmm. You read his mind and his heart, did you?
We have no interest in things that "you have no doubt about" unless you can give us a good reason for believing them.

Before what? How do we know what was going on in Saul's heart and how he prayed or not or if he was starting to see through the religious baloney? God made it clear if we call He will answer. The action of Him answering Saul tells me that Saul had cried out in his heart. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction sort of thing. If I see the reaction, I know there was some action. Elementary.

Now you're just making stuff up. You're trying to apply a law of physics to theology. It's a nice idea, but it's just on your say-so. What we do know is that the story says that Saul hated Christians, and that Jesus spoke to him, and that Saul then became a Christian himself.
In other words, God saw something he didn't like, and intervened to stop it. Which he doesn't do with abortions. Why not? Presumably because - like most Christians of some forty years ago - God is pro-choice. This would make sense, as there is nothing in the Bible against abortion, and even a case in which God advocates abortions.

Obviously that reference was to people that would have no real ability to choose good and evil. Obviously also you are not here to debate or reason. Cheers

Not at all. She made a good point. You're the one who said that if you can never choose evil, you're like a "neutered cat". She's pointing out the flaw in your logic; if God can never choose evil either, he's like a neutered cat, by your own statements.

No. If you chose not to sacrifice your neighbor's kid, or stab him in the eye with a fork, you are choosing not to give in to absolute wickedness and evil. You still had a choice.

You missed the point. If a person would never choose to do an evil thing like that, this means that it is perfectly possible for God to have created beings with free will who would quite simply never choose to do evil, any more than they would choose to bite off their own tongues.
If you think that is impossible, then the question becomes: what will life be like in heaven? Will people still be able to sin there?
You're caught on the horns of a dilemma here. Either we must have free will - in which case, heaven is impossible - or living perfect lives is possible, which begs the question, why didn't God just do that, instead of sending most of the human race to hell?
Please try to keep to the point and not misunderstand the question. I hope you won't say something like "God did create us perfect, until Adam and Eve messed up", or "God doesn't send people to hell".

No. Free will is free will. Free will with no ability to choose is something else. There is no being a little pregnant either a woman is or not. There is no such thing as sort of good sin. Jesus had to die to free us from it. It is not a matter of us freeing ourselves by being sort of good or at least not overt monsters. Why question how God created us? Would He not know what He was doing? I have to assume He knew better than you.

This is a debating forum. Questioning God's motives, and asking Christians if they can defend them, is what we do here.
You have been asked a question, and we are waiting to see if you can answer it. Saying "It's just that way because God said so," is an admission of defeat.

 

[Belk]

Not really. Once again God never intended to allow the child to be killed! He would not ask man to sacrifice that way. But He Himself did it for us. This was a test.

He literally did ask that. Right there in the bible.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

No. Free will is free will. Free will with no ability to choose is something else.

You don't seem to be getting it. You've already agreed that I have the ability to choose but always choose a particular option.

You can't agree on the one hand that the god you believe in made me with the free will to molest a child but also with no proclivity to ever do so, and then say that the god you believe in couldn't have made everyone with the free will to never freely choose to molest a child. Unless you perhaps think it would have been too difficult for your god to do so. Or perhaps you don't believe that your god made humans. Either of those would help you avoid being contradictory, but I'm not sure you believe either of those things.

 

[dad]

He literally did ask that. Right there in the bible.

If He would not allow it then it was a test only. He never really asked that, because He never would have allowed it. Within the context of the test, it was asked of course, to see if Abraham loved Him.

 

[Rajni]

Obviously that reference was to people that would have no real ability to choose good and evil. Obviously also you are not here to debate or reason. Cheers

Wow, that was easy!
My points remain "undefeated", then.

 

[dad]

and


Fine. So God is willing to intervene in human affairs if people ask him to. And he's also willing to intervene in human affairs if people don't want him to. Which brings us back to the point we've all been making: why doesn't God do something about abortions if he doesn't like them? By your own admission, there's nothing stopping God from doing something, should he so desire.

Nations were judged for child sacrifice. Not all of human rule on earth was involved. Sometimes selected peoples fill up their cup of iniquity so full, that action from God results. That does not mean all people on earth and free will itself for mankind was ended. The clock is ticking though on freedom of choice. There is only now to repent, that window will close one day.

Hmmm. You read his mind and his heart, did you?
We have no interest in things that "you have no doubt about" unless you can give us a good reason for believing them.

Looking at a bible full of actions and reactions, we can deduce that a reaction from God results from an action of man. Namely prayer, repenting, seeking, asking. When I see Saul getting that good ol reaction I know there is a reason.

Now you're just making stuff up. You're trying to apply a law of physics to theology. It's a nice idea, but it's just on your say-so. What we do know is that the story says that Saul hated Christians, and that Jesus spoke to him, and that Saul then became a Christian himself.
In other words, God saw something he didn't like, and intervened to stop it. Which he doesn't do with abortions. Why not? Presumably because - like most Christians of some forty years ago - God is pro-choice. This would make sense, as there is nothing in the Bible against abortion, and even a case in which God advocates abortions.

Abortion is just some invented word for killing babies. Of course the bible makes it clear sacrificing children and killing them, or anyone else is very evil.
As for the action and reaction thingie, that is valid. God laid out what actions of ours would invoke actions from Him! Every sincere prayer results in action.

Not at all. She made a good point. You're the one who said that if you can never choose evil, you're like a "neutered cat". She's pointing out the flaw in your logic; if God can never choose evil either, he's like a neutered cat, by your own statements.

Having a person with neutered ability to choose has zero to do with God's abilities. Gong. She posited some bizarre limited so called free will for mankind.

You missed the point. If a person would never choose to do an evil thing like that, this means that it is perfectly possible for God to have created beings with free will who would quite simply never choose to do evil, any more than they would choose to bite off their own tongues.

Pi in the sky aside, Adam and Eve DID have real choice. The choice was not something like, 'I won't allow your feet to walk anywhere near that tree' or 'I will deafen your ears and tie your tongue if that ol serpent is ever near'. The choice was between real evil and real good.

If you think that is impossible, then the question becomes: what will life be like in heaven? Will people still be able to sin there?
You're caught on the horns of a dilemma here. Either we must have free will - in which case, heaven is impossible - or living perfect lives is possible, which begs the question, why didn't God just do that, instead of sending most of the human race to hell?
Please try to keep to the point and not misunderstand the question. I hope you won't say something like "God did create us perfect, until Adam and Eve messed up", or "God doesn't send people to hell".

Wrong. Jesus made heaven totally absolutely possible for sinners!

 

[Belk]

If He would not allow it then it was a test only. He never really asked that, because He never would have allowed it. Within the context of the test, it was asked of course, to see if Abraham loved Him.

I do not find your claims of knowing the mind of an infinite being credible. If God requires people to be willing to sacrifice their children you can't claim this is something God is against. Unless you are claiming God demands people to be willing to perform actions that are against his nature?

 

[dad]

You don't seem to be getting it. You've already agreed that I have the ability to choose but always choose a particular option.

The ability to choose has nothing to do with having to pick one option actually.

You can't agree on the one hand that the god you believe in made me with the free will to molest a child but also with no proclivity to ever do so, and then say that the god you believe in couldn't have made everyone with the free will to never freely choose to molest a child...[/QUOTE]

The depths we sink or rise to depends on our choices! If we reject Jesus, we are on a path to wickedness so great, there are no real limits. If we accept Jesus we are on a path to eternal wonders and joys and goodness, and happiness and joy.

 

[dad]

I do not find your claims of knowing the mind of an infinite being credible. If God requires people to be willing to sacrifice their children you can't claim this is something God is against. Unless you are claiming God demands people to be willing to perform actions that are against his nature?

Anyone reading His word to man knows the rules and what will follow certain choices and actions actually. No need for your vote at all.