What should God do with Atheists?

briareos · May 12, 2011

Bombila

I don't see how anything you've said negates Adam's status wrt to knowing whether his disobedience was evil or not. I see no difference at all between 'being aware of what he should do' and being aware doing the opposite was wrong, which equates imo to knowing the difference between right and wrong, or good and evil.

I haven't tried to prove that their is a diffrence between knowing what you should do and being aware of evil. I have only asserted that the lack of such a possibility is not substantiated that will be the extent of my argument.

If Adam could be tempted to do wrong, then he must have been able to recognise whether something was wrong or right, regardless of who or what told him to do it. That God was the one who told him is irrelevant unless he already knew disobeying God was wrong.

I say it is not substantiated, or any more than a pipedream that knowledge of what one should do is equal to the knowledge of evil. The story of the bible, which is all that I will defend says that Adam was instructed, that he was able and that he was not aware of evil. I will not defend a story outside of those defining characteristics and I currently do not find any conflict between those ideas. If you do, then I will admit that I cannot blame you for doing so and that I do not have the ability to show you otherwise.

briareos · May 12, 2011

hollyda

I was not trying to establish fault in your message. I felt the need to inform you of what I said, if I did not need to then I can accept that. At the moment I do not see that we disagree on anything.

Freodin · May 12, 2011

briareos said:
Freodin

Maybe the problem is myne but I cannot imagine any delima that has a limitness number of choices. Such seems to deny the characteristics of the delima itself.

I guess I didn't express that correctly. I didn't imply a number of possible options to chose from that is limited, but the possibility to choose at all.

Free will implies that I do indeed have the option to decide. This is the problem of the "omniscience / free will" idea.
Some might say, that in any given situation, I must be really free to chose between the presented options for the mechanism to be considered "free will". A foreknowledge would prevent that... there is no possibility to chose the "not pre-known" option.

But for the sake of this argument, let's say that "free will" does only imply that I myself chose, without the result being known to me beforehand. That could still be seen as "free will".

Still, in every situation, I have to be able to make different decisions. Only one of them will be made in the end, but the option for me to chose must be there.
This, after all, is the importance of the "free will" argument for divine judgement. I choose, I must bear the consequences - salvation or damnation.

But if this openess to choose is not given... if in any possible situation I can only choose one option... then there is no choice at all, and thus no free will.

This is said the be the case in both heaven and hell. There is no free will in either.

So if "free will" is of such an importance that it alone decides your eternal fate... why not give it eternal duration?

briareos · May 12, 2011

Cabal

It might show your personal interpretations of the Bible to be incorrect.

Valid information from you could, your expectations could not.

No, it has nothing to do with choice being dependent on their creation, the point is that God could have created people who did not make the wrong choice, and God knew they would. Why not make people who he knows are going to make the right choice? You're essentially making people with the full knowledge that you're going to end up having them tortured forever. And this is supposed to be loving?

That is not the story the bible tells. Your stated solution confines your theory to being that the sin is indicative of the creation, that is not established nor is it the story of the bible and as such I have no need to refute it. The bible says Adam was able to make the right decision.

Go ahead, but it is not a conclusion strongly supported by the text.

I honestly can't see how this a functional response to my statement that you quoted so I at a loss of how to respond here.

Fair enough. Honest answers are better than dodging points anyday.

For sure.

You want to consider wearing the wrong type of fabric and eating shellfish a sin, knock yourself out. Doesn't mean it's remotely sensible.

And your lack of ability to consider it sensible is no authority on the matter, especially when your criticism needs to remain confined to an accurate picture of what your criticising and that remains to be a story of a God telling people things to not do, a God being an entity that would by it's simplest nature be beyond our ability to comprehend. I am debating the truth of the story to you and will not begin to, I am trying to defend to the integrity of the story.

Bombila · May 12, 2011

briareos said:
Bombila

I haven't tried to prove that their is a diffrence between knowing what you should do and being aware of evil. I have only asserted that the lack of such a possibility is not substantiated that will be the extent of my argument.

I say it is not substantiated, or any more than a pipedream that knowledge of what one should do is equal to the knowledge of evil. The story of the bible, which is all that I will defend says that Adam was instructed, that he was able and that he was not aware of evil. I will not defend a story outside of those defining characteristics and I currently do not find any conflict between those ideas. If you do, then I will admit that I cannot blame you for doing so and that I do not have the ability to show you otherwise.

Well, thanks for the faint acknowledgement that it isn't a very definitive story and cannot really be analysed much further as to what is meant by 'knowledge of good and evil' in the context of Adam's choice.

Cabal · May 12, 2011

briareos said:
Valid information from you could, your expectations could not.

Information is only valid to you if it conforms to your personal understanding of the text, when you think it does not you airily dismiss it, however your understanding could be the one in error.

That is not the story the bible tells. Your stated solution confines your theory to being that the sin is indicative of the creation, that is not established nor is it the story of the bible and as such I have no need to refute it. The bible says Adam was able to make the right decision.

There is nothing that I have said that is contrary to the Bible. God made Adam, knowing the choice he would make. Now, this could have been the right choice or the wrong choice, yes? So why did God knowingly make a person who made the wrong choice? I'm not trying to argue that choice is determined, but God still creates people knowing the choices they make, so why did he choose to create someone who made the wrong choice instead of the right one?

And your lack of ability to consider it sensible is no authority on the matter, especially when your criticism needs to remain confined to an accurate picture of what your criticising and that remains to be a story of a God telling people things to not do, a God being an entity that would by it's simplest nature be beyond our ability to comprehend.

So when you're defending God, it's ok to make claims about him (despite him being beyond comprehension), but if you're criticising him, well he's just beyond comprehension.

Makes perfect sense and isn't at all biased in favour of your position :doh:

I am debating the truth of the story to you and will not begin to, I am trying to defend to the integrity of the story.

Which is a pretty thankless task given that it doesn't involve an informed choice.

briareos · May 12, 2011

Freodin

I guess I didn't express that correctly. I didn't imply a number of possible options to chose from that is limited, but the possibility to choose at all.

Free will implies that I do indeed have the option to decide. This is the problem of the "omniscience / free will" idea.
Some might say, that in any given situation, I must be really free to chose between the presented options for the mechanism to be considered "free will". A foreknowledge would prevent that... there is no possibility to chose the "not pre-known" option.

But for the sake of this argument, let's say that "free will" does only imply that I myself chose, without the result being known to me beforehand. That could still be seen as "free will".

Still, in every situation, I have to be able to make different decisions. Only one of them will be made in the end, but the option for me to chose must be there.
This, after all, is the importance of the "free will" argument for divine judgement. I choose, I must bear the consequences - salvation or damnation.

But if this openess to choose is not given... if in any possible situation I can only choose one option... then there is no choice at all, and thus no free will.

This is said the be the case in both heaven and hell. There is no free will in either.

So if "free will" is of such an importance that it alone decides your eternal fate... why not give it eternal duration?

I do not agree that the foreknowledge contradicts the ability to choose. I do not agree that knowledge determines ability to act or the number of options.

Freodin · May 12, 2011

briareos said:
Freodin

I do not agree that the foreknowledge contradicts the ability to choose. I do not agree that knowledge determines ability to act or the number of options.

I did not say it does. Read my post again and then adress the point I made instead of the one I didn't make.

briareos · May 12, 2011

Cabal

Information is only valid to you if it conforms to your personal understanding of the text.

Well yes, I would not contest to something I do not disagree with and I do not disagree with your contention of something that I do not believe to begin with.

when you think it does not you airily dismiss it, however your understanding could be the one in error.

You have a responsibility to make your aguments more than strawmen, and untill your representation of the story is accurate, then your contentions are only that.

There is nothing that I have said that is contrary to the Bible.

There are plenty of assertions you have made that are not accurate or contained in the bible.

God made Adam, knowing the choice he would make.

The bible does not say that. Not to my knowledge, feel free to substantiate it.

Now, this could have been the right choice or the wrong choice, yes? So why did God knowingly make a person who made the wrong choice? I'm not trying to argue that choice is determined, but God still creates people knowing the choices they make, so why did he choose to create someone who made the wrong choice instead of the right one?

God created something he was pleased with, the knowledge that they would fail him would not create a reason to not create them or change them. Further more it is not substantiated in the bible that he did know that they would fail him, not to my knowledge.

So when you're defending God, it's ok to make claims about him (despite him being beyond comprehension), but if you're criticising him, well he's just beyond comprehension.

Makes perfect sense and isn't at all biased in favour of your position

I am remaining accurate to the story, you are not, your contentions are strawmen, why should I accomodate them? If your willing to criticise the story, you should be willing to accept the terms of the story, if you are not then you are not fair to begin with and I have no obligation to meet you on those terms.

Which is a pretty thankless task given that it doesn't involve an informed choice.

What is a thankless task and what creates the lack of the informed choice, sorry, I simply don't follow you.

briareos · May 12, 2011

Freodin

I did not say it does. Read my post again and then adress the point I made instead of the one I didn't make.

I disagreed with this statement.

Some might say, that in any given situation, I must be really free to chose between the presented options for the mechanism to be considered "free will". A foreknowledge would prevent that... there is no possibility to chose the "not pre-known" option.

By saying that I don't agree that the foreknowledge contradicts freewill and also telling you why I do not agree by saying I do not agree that knowledge determines ability to act or the number of options.

Maybe I missed something, certainly possible but the rest of your information seemd to say that we must infact have the ability to choose, that that is required of free will. To that I agree.

Cabal · May 12, 2011

briareos said:
Well yes, I would not contest to something I do not disagree with and I do not disagree with your contention of something that I do not believe to begin with.

So given that we've established we're talking about little more than your opinion here, how about we drop the "Biblical Christianity" tag, seeing as your opinion does not define that?

The bible does not say that. Not to my knowledge, feel free to substantiate it.

1 John 3:20
Psalm 139:1-3

briareos · May 12, 2011

Bombila

Well, thanks for the faint acknowledgement that it isn't a very definitive story and cannot really be analysed much further as to what is meant by 'knowledge of good and evil' in the context of Adam's choice.

Sure, I don't know everything and I could never say otherwise. I do though say that I feel your stated contention to be trivial and not an apparant failure. That's how I feel anyway. I also do not believe the lack of definition makes it very void if definition. It's a spectrum.

Bombila · May 12, 2011

briareos said:
Bombila

Sure, I don't know everything and I could never say otherwise. I do though say that I feel your stated contention to be trivial and not an apparant failure. That's how I feel anyway. I also do not believe the lack of definition makes it very void if definition. It's a spectrum.

I don't think it's trivial at all. We are discussing a myth (my belief) that is at the very beginning of the purported fall of humanity, the original sin. It must be important to understand what is meant by knowledge of right and wrong, and whether Adam possessed it before his disobedience to God.

And of course you are entitled to being unbothered by the ambivalent nature of the story. A vast portion of Christian thought believes the creation myths are just that: myths.

briareos · May 12, 2011

Cabal

So given that we've established we're talking about little more than your opinion here, how about we drop the "Biblical Christianity" tag, seeing as your opinion does not define that?

No, becuase where I have admitted my lack of perfection which does not create a lack biblical christianity, you have made blatant errors and constructed absolute strawmen. I do not need to be perfectly knowledgeable of the bible to be able to restrain a conversation to other very apparent characteristics.

1 John 3:20
Psalm 139:1-3

Neither of those scriptures say that God knows what does not exist such as future actions of individuals not made. Other scriptures very easily lean toward saying that God does not know what men will do or that he did know what men would do. The combination of these easily discerned truths brings a very comfortable belief that God does not neccesarily what will happen before it does, or specificly what men will do before they do.

Gishin · May 12, 2011

"before you formed in the womb I knew you." anyone?

Cabal · May 12, 2011

briareos said:
No, becuase where I have admitted my lack of perfection which does create a lack biblical christianity, you have made blatant errors and constructed absolute strawmen. I do not need to be perfectly knowledgeable of the bible to be able to restrain a conversation to other very apparent characteristics.

Except you've not justified that it is little more than your opinion - it's certainly not "apparent". That is all you having a very high opinion of your opinion.

Neither of those scriptures say that God knows what does not exist such as future actions of individuals not made. Other scriptures very easily lean toward saying that God does not know what men will do or that he did know what men would do. The combination of these easily discerned truths brings a very comfortable belief that God does not neccesarily what will happen before it does, or specificly what men will do before they do.

Kinda buggers a lot of prophecy, that.

Ok, so you want to redefine "know all things" as "does not know all things". At the very least, you could conclude the Bible is contradictory here.

Gotcha.

We're done here.

briareos · May 12, 2011

Bombila

I don't think it's trivial at all. We are discussing a myth (my belief) that is at the very beginning of the purported fall of humanity, the original sin. It must be important to understand what is meant by knowledge of right and wrong, and whether Adam possessed it before his disobedience to God.

And of course you are entitled to being unbothered by the ambivalent nature of the story. A vast portion of Christian thought believes the creation myths are just that: myths.

Well I do not condemn you for your finding what you do as important and never would. I will not resort to Ad Hominem and will not be unfair. I personally find less importance in the matter than you do. I acknowledge my lack of ability to answer all of your concerns. The bible does though say that Adam was not aware of evil before he ate the fruit, it also says he knew what he should do and had the ability to choose what he should have. That he comprehended evil, does not seem to be an obligation.

briareos · May 12, 2011

Cabal

Except you've not justified that it is little more than your opinion - it's certainly not apparent.

Your correct, I have not tried to prove everything I have said and you have not requested such of me untill now.

Kinda buggers prophecy.

I am not so sure. What is clear is what the bible does actually seem to say, and that is not that.

Ok, so you want to redefine "know all things" as "does not know all things". At the very least, you could conclude the Bible is contradictory here.

Non Sequitur and strawman.

Gotcha.

We're done here.

Bye.

Mud Hole · May 12, 2011

Pulls out his knife and prepares to remove the tension in the thread.

briareos · May 12, 2011

Gishin

"before you formed in the womb I knew you." anyone?

I see your concern and point and appreciate the honest effort. The repeated statments from God going down to the garden in the book of Genesis in order to learn what all the fuss was about sheds further light.

also these...

Jeremiah 19.5
and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, a thing which I never commanded or spoke of, nor did it ever enter My mind

Jeremiah 32.35
And they built the high places of Baal that are in the valley of Ben-hinnom to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech, which I had not commanded them nor had it entered My mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin

Jeremiah 7.31
They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire--something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind

What should God do with Atheists?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Devout believer in a theologically different God

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Devout believer in a theologically different God

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

My name is Mud!

Well-Known Member

Similar threads