If you had God's powers, how would you communicate with people?

[BigV]

I wouldn't let in thieves, either. I would like to leave my purse on the table... and find it back soon.
I'm not insinuating that anyone posting here could be a thief, though. Just an example.

The problem with your analogies, in my view, is that human behavior is not fixed.

Not sure if you are aware, but I was born in the USSR, and I see you are from Germany. In the 1940's, Germans were overwhelmingly Christian and yet, the Nazi's ended up invading Atheist Soviet Union and ended up being almost entirely responsible for the Holocaust. I don't blame you for any of this, just point out an example on how calling someone thief or rapist, etc... is a useless label, because we are shaped by our circumstances and opportunities. Before they were at war, most of the Nazi Germany's soldiers were probably good and moral people and I doubt that the majority wanted to see Jews killed. However, the war changed them.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Did they choose not to know it was a possibility?

Personally, I can't choose to believe or disbelieve anything. The way I know this is to ask myself "Can you start to believe the earth is flat based solely on willpower alone".

I cannot do this. I also cannot disbelieve that I have two hands. When asking other people these questions (I have), not a single person has said they could believe anything or disbelive anything by willpower alone.

When I say that I don't believe in any god, it's because my brain has no reason to believe such a thing, because it hasn't found any evidence to be worthy of acceptance. It's not a conscious choice. Now, you can either believe this truth, or you can do what other Christians have done and disingenuously deny it and say that I can, for example, actually choose to believe the earth is flat on willpower alone.

So, when an atheist says they don't choose to go to a hell, it's the obvious truth. It takes a fair bit of cognitive dissonance to believe otherwise.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The problem with your analogies, in my view, is that human behavior is not fixed.

Not sure if you are aware, but I was born in the USSR, and I see you are from Germany. In the 1940's, Germans were overwhelmingly Christian and yet, the Nazi's ended up invading Atheist Soviet Union and ended up being almost entirely responsible for the Holocaust. I don't blame you for any of this, just point out an example on how calling someone thief or rapist, etc... is a useless label, because we are shaped by our circumstances and opportunities. Before they were at war, most of the Nazi Germany's soldiers were probably good and moral people and I doubt that the majority wanted to see Jews killed. However, the war changed them.

You're from the former USSR? That's interesting, so is @devolved (or at least from some place quite close), but I haven't seen him around here on CF since.... oh, like a week or so before you came back on to CF. It's always funny how things work like that. He's an interesting chap with his own interesting view on things. I wonder what he'd think about the discussion in this thread?

@devolved! Yo, @devolved, are you still floating out in there somewhere in the great Postmodern Beyond?

 

[MrsFoundit]

Personally, I can't choose to believe or disbelieve anything. The way I know this is to ask myself "Can you start to believe the earth is flat based solely on willpower alone".

Your reason for believing that in Christianity faith is based solely on willpower alone?

It is not.

Not to mention "faith" in a Christian context is not just reckoning something exists.

 

[BigV]

You're from the former USSR? That's interesting, so is @devolved (or at least from some place quite close), but I haven't seen him around here on CF since.... oh, like a week or so before you came back on to CF. It's always funny how things work like that. He's an interesting chap with his own interesting view on things. I wonder what he'd think about the discussion in this thread?

@devolved! Yo, @devolved, are you still floating out in there somewhere in the great Postmodern Beyond?

That's interesting. You seem to imply we are one and the same? Everyone who is born in USSR is alike, just like people born in other countries.

Other than being born in the USSR, anything else in your view makes us alike? Do we share the same wisdom and wit?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That's interesting. You seem to imply we are one and the same? Everyone who is born in USSR is alike, just like people born in other countries.

No, I'm not implying that you're one and the same, but since you bring it up ...

... but no, @devolved doesn't come around that often, and I just thought it was serendiptously ironic that you show up just a few days after his last post. That's all. My juxtaposing you with him wasn't meant as an invitation for you (or anyone else) to think I was insinuating anything. Suspicious much, Big V?

Other than being born in the USSR, anything else in your view makes us alike? Do we share the same wisdom and wit?

Yes, you Russians are all alike: I just wake up each day with a note about this taped to my forehead so I don't forget that it's a very vital, essential social truth in this big wide world that we all live in.

But seriously, why would you jump to the conclusion that I think all Russians are the same? ... I've been pretty sure they're not the same for quite some time now, actually.

I could ask you a similar question: Do you think all Christians are the same? Do you think all gods are the same?

 

[thomas_t]

The problem with your analogies, in my view, is that human behavior is not fixed.

Jesus will decide, how fixed it really is. He will do this for all mankind.
Anyways I'll stop here with my analogies or examples. Otherwise I would pretend to sit in judgement on others, which I do not. I think my point is clear... letting anybody in after death can present a danger for those already in.

Nazi Germany committed a lot of atrocities, that's clear.

I don't blame you for any of this,

thank you.
the good German soldier that went out to war and then, all of a sudden, became bad?
War changed them as opposed to their hearts?
I doubt this though.
Let Jesus decide this again.

Thomas

 

[thomas_t]

It's most regrettable, the way Christians say that people "choose" to go to hell. It's an absurd situation, as a moment's thought will show.

Bible teaches there are people out there who literally choose to be against Jesus. Mark 12:7.
Jesus told them about their destiny in Mark 12:9
I think it's the same as choosing hell?
Well, they chose to have the power and the money here on earth - at the expense of Jesus sending them to hell, I guess.
For me, saying people choose hell is just a shortened description of what is laid out in Mark 12:7.

I'm not saying that any non-believer here is like the Pharisees in their decision. This was just an example to show that there are people who, more or less, choose hell.

 

[MrsFoundit]

Let Jesus decide this again.

Yes, Jesus does the judging part as to who chose what and why. Is an atheist always someone who chose not to be in heaven? I doubt it. What happens to people who express faith in ways not labelled Christian, I believe they are judged, not that I can judge how. Are people caught up in bad political regimes shut out, I do not believe I judge their part in it, Jesus does. Does someone get to heaven for just using a Christian label on them self? I doubt it.

Saying that Jesus is "to judge the living and the dead" is not to say and we humans know how to do that.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Your reason for believing that in Christianity faith is based solely on willpower alone?

It is not.

Did I mention the word "faith" at all? Let me go back and look...

No, no I did not...

You seem to have missed the point.

Not to mention "faith" in a Christian context is not just reckoning something exists.

It was brought up that atheists choose to go to hell. I'm showing that the idea is nonsense.

If you'd like to go back and respond to what I actually wrote, please feel free...

 

[MrsFoundit]

It was brought up that atheists choose to go to hell. I'm showing that the idea is nonsense.

Were does it say "atheists choose to go to hell"? Can you cite a post from a Christian that says those words?

If you'd like to go back and respond to what I actually wrote, please feel free...

Note my post 149 while you are looking...

 

[MrsFoundit]

Faith | Definition of Faith by Lexico - means "2 - Strong belief in God"

Belief | Definition of Belief by Lexico - means "2 - ... faith, or confidence in someone or something."

Two words that mean the same thing.

 

[BigV]

Yes, you Russians are all alike:

ah.. you just assumed all USSR are Russian.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

ah.. you just assumed all USSR are Russian.

You mean, you took that statement literally? Did you also take literally the part about tapping a memo to my forehead every day so I remember something needless?

 

[InterestedAtheist]

as you said in #45, popularity is not a measure of quality. So you can't rule out that God has good stuff conveyed greatly. Even if I mix up popularity and effectivity, as you say... you don't. And God isn't popular with the most.

No. He isn't.
And that means that most people will be going to hell.
That's a bad thing for them. They will suffer forever, in the worst possible pain. By definition, hell is the worst place to go to.
If God loves us, He does not want us to suffer.
Therefore, God wants to save us.
If He wants to save us, but hasn't saved us - and He hasn't, because most people are going to go to hell - then there are only two possibilities.
Either God didn't try to save us, in which case He obviously doesn't love us that much.
Or He did try to save us, and failed to.
QED.

I would try.
I would invite all people to the Gospel for showing love. Inviting is nice.

That's nice of you. But in fact, you said you wouldn't try.
Remember, in Post number 95. You said:
"The decision is theirs. Even if I prevented them from running into the burning building... they would run into the next burning one."
The implication being, you wouldn't always try to save them.
I would. If I was there, and had the means, I would always try to save the person from going to their doom, because it would be immoral to stand aside.
But you said you would stand aside if they insisted upon running to their deaths.
Just like God doesn't intervene to stop people going to Hell.
Oh sure, we have the bible. The churches. The nice people on Christian Forums assuring us that we should be Christians, and to beware of hell.
But you know something? We atheists don't believe it's true.
And so, innocently, happily, we trip along the path to damnation.

Could God prove that He was true? Of course He could.He has the power and wisdom to provide any kind of proof we could ask for.
And if He did, then we would believe, and be saved.

But God doesn't prove that He's true. You know He doesn't. You know there are people in the world, good people, kind people, people who don't deserve infinite punishment, who sincerely do not believe in the Christian God.

You're not going to tell me this is God's fault. As a Christian, you can't. Blaming God is not allowed.
But if it isn't God's fault that I'm going to hell, then whose is it? Mine? For not believing something I am unable to believe?
It's a paradox. But the solution is simple.
God isn't real.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

No, you have heard them saying God does not use force.

That's because you are misusing the word "force". You seem to imagine that God directly appearing to a person and directly convincing them that hell exists and that they are in danger of it would be a violation of their free will. Of course, it would not. If I knew that heaven and hell existed, I would still be free to choose what to do. But I can only choose to go to hell if I know it exists. And of course - you have my solemn word on this - I do not know that hell exists.

Not my words. Your own.

No, actually it was you who said that unbelievers choose to go to hell. Not using those precise words, of course, but that was your meaning. In Post 98:
@Larnievc said "Yet he (God) does not stop the adult from running into Hell."
And you answered:
"It is hardly running, it is not a toddler, opportunities to change direction are abundant, your direction is your choice. You go whatever way you want."
You go whatever way you want.
In other words, if you end up in hell, it was your choice to do so.
Imagine that one day you end up in Jahannum, the Muslim version of hell. Perhaps a demon comes to torment you there, and engages you in conversation.
"Well, you chose to come here!" it says.
"I didn't! Of course I didn't! I chose to go to God in the Christian heaven!" you say.
"You knew that there was a Muslim hell. You knew there were Korans. You could have read one and found the truth. But you didn't. You chose not to. You chose to come here," he explains.
"But I didn't think this was real!" you protest.
"You mean you chose to believe it wasn't!" he replies.
That is the exact logic you're using here, saying that unbelievers choose to go to hell. See how the logic doesn't work?

Did they choose not to know it was a possibility?

It is impossible to choose not to know something. So no, they didn't.
Unless you are saying that you chose not to know that Jehannum, the Islamic version of hell, does not exist.

From CF Statement of Faith - not as you say:
"Who for us men and for our salvation
came down from Heaven,
and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary,
and became man"
CF Statement of Faith | Christian Forums

The God who became man.
Have you ever met Him? This man, I mean. Jesus. In the flesh.
No? In that case, saying that God came down from heaven two thousand years ago and spoke in person to our very distant ancestors means that the point of the article is quite correct. God could come down again, couldn't He? He could speak to us in person. He could communicate in a myriad of ways.
"But this simple and reasonable strategy has not been carried out. Instead, the theists say, God has adopted a strategy for getting human beings’ attention that can only reasonably be described as bizarre – always remaining hidden, never clearly showing himself despite it being well within his power, but dropping coy hints from time to time. Imagine if you loved a person with all your heart, and wanted them to love you in return; but instead of approaching them, introducing yourself and explaining your feelings, you chose to remain hidden, never letting them see or hear you, but occasionally trying to get their attention through indirect means: leaving money where they might find it, or creeping into their bedroom while they were asleep and tucking the blankets around them, or sending a steady stream of representatives to knock on the person’s door and tell them that you loved them and wanted to spend your life with them – but ordering those representatives to turn down any of the person’s requests to actually see you as indicative of a hurtful lack of faith on their part.
Is this how a rational person behaves? In such a situation, in fact, would you blame the other person for beginning to doubt whether you really existed at all? And yet, if we accept the claims of many theists, this method is how God chooses to relate to humanity. What could possibly be the point of this behavior?"

An adult is not a child.
5 words, not 6 pages.

One word: analogy.
Dictionary:
1a : a comparison of two otherwise unlike things based on resemblance of a particular aspect
b : resemblance in some particulars between things otherwise unlike.

A human toddler and a burning building is not analogous to a human adult and Christian understanding of "to judge the living and the dead" CF Statement of Faith | Christian Forums.

Of course it is.
God has enormously more wisdom and power than us.
Adults have enormously more wisdom and power than infants.
The analogy is just fine.
But you can't accept it. Because if it is true, then the God we have here is like a very different analogy. An absent and negligent parent. A person who lurks around in the background, watching as their precious child, who they love with all their heart, bumbles around, in danger of getting run over by a car, or eating poisonous berries, or any of a million dangers/

 

[dlamberth]

It's a paradox. But the solution is simple.
God isn't real.

Or, perhaps, there are other ways of knowing the Divine that you have not yet touched on.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Or, perhaps, there are other ways of knowing the Divine that you have not yet touched on.

Perhaps. And perhaps I am actually a butterfly dreaming that I am human.

 

[dlamberth]

Perhaps. And perhaps I am actually a butterfly dreaming that I am human.

The butterfly...I love butterflies. One of the things about them that you reminded of is this:
In some quarters, the process of a caterpillar becoming a butterfly has had a way of generating spiritual lessons. Those lessons, often shared through the art of storytelling, are passed on for things like understanding spiritual growth.
Just an aside, sorry.

There really are other ways of looking at the Divine than what you've been focusing on thus far in this thread. I applaud your Atheist stamp though. I wouldn't want to have it any different. I have no desire to change you or convince you of anything. That would be rather self-ego on my part. All I'm saying is that if other ways are not explored, your circle of argument appears rather limited to me.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

I wouldn't want to have it any different. I have no desire to change you or convince you of anything.

Thank you for your kind wishes.