if that God is going to arrange things so that people who hold a particular philosophical position thereby condemn themselves to eternal torment
Can we not at least agree that if there is a God, and if that God is going to subject people to eternal torment for holding a particular philosophical position; or to put it another way I have heard if that God is going to arrange things so that people who hold a particular philosophical position thereby condemn themselves to eternal torment; then that God should not be worshipped but opposed?
Not only does Ian hit the nail on the head with his previous post, no-one will experience eternal torment for holding a "particular philosophical position". All humanity has a problem that separates them from God, namely our sinful condition and it is this that sends us all to hell unless we are in Christ:
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:23)
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16)
The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. (1 Peter 3:9, emphasis added)
This is hardly God setting up a particular situation for people to be condemned...
The trouble is an omnipotent omnsicient God creating everything can see exactly what will happen based on his choices when creating everything. The moment God clicks his metaphorical fingers to create everything he knows that:
1) Mankind will Fall and he will have to punish them.
2) He'll have to kill almost all of them in a massive flood.
3) He'll have to impregnate a woman to create Jesus.
4) Most humans won't accept the story, or invent a different religion.
5) He'll have to create hell to burn most of their souls.
etc etc
God must have decided despite all this it was better to create this universe than not.
Getting back to the point about Atheism, obviously not all Christians believe what I have written above. Some say "God can't lie" or "God must be moral" or "God can't tolerate sin" which means God isn't entirely omnipotent, and some don't believe he is omniscient. There are tens on thousands of different sects, all believing slightly (or very) different things.
As Ian was pointing out above, these may be slightly archaic beliefs that modern Christians don't hold, so there isn't a lot of of point in doing what I've just done, as tempting as it is. Much better to ask them what they believe and why, and see if it has any merit.
I think, Ian was saying he believes because of historical evidence /philosophical reasoning.
As far as historical evidence goes, I'm not sure I could believe anything that extraordinary from just historical evidence. It doesn't even need to be historical. There are tens of thousands of Alien Abduction testimonies from the last 50 years, and I can speak to these people. I don't believe these either.
I'm also not sure you can demonstrate the existence of something by philosophical means alone. That is a huge topic!
Christians, don't worry though. If God is real, then he knows exactly what would be needed to convince me of his existence, even if I don't. He knows that if I wasn't convinced by talking to people like yourselves or looking at the evidence, he could intervene and reveal himself to me, so who knows, maybe this will happen?
... and those that think they can tell who's a "true Christian" and who's not are kidding themselves.
For me, there is no conflict with the omnipotence and omniscience of God and the points you made above. God chose to create beings that were capable of making decisions based completely on their own free will AND He knows what we will decide before we decide. I don't see how this compromises God attributes of being all-powerful and all-knowing. If our decisions have consequences, I can't see how this compromises these attributes either.
The argument that only a cruel unloving God would allow circumstances like these only holds water if there is no way out for us. The fact that Jesus Christ provides a way out (free of charge) leaves us with no excuse. The evidence available surrounding Jesus Christ has led to people of various intellects, classes, cultures, races etc coming to Christ.
Assuming a God exists:
With regards to free will, there are plenty of things that God has ensured I can't choose to do*, so why not ensure I can't choose to not believe in him?
*e.g. I can't choose to visit the nearest solar system, etc.
If we were created unable to choose NOT to believe in God (ie programmed TO believe in Him), we would not be capable of a genuinely loving relationship with God - it would be forced upon us and this would violate our "free will". If you are FORCED to believe in something and there is no choice in the matter, particularly a relationship, there will be far less genuine pleasure in the process on either side.
I'm quite sure that if this were the case, you would (quite rightly) allege this was unfair. As it happens, we CAN all chose whether or not to believe in God - this demonstrates complete freedom and is completely fair!
Threatening people with punishment in hell for diseliief =/= free choice. It is coercion.
2) You are assuming we can just choose what we believe. I can't just go and genuinely believe the Earth is flat, even if told this belief will bring me great rewards.
I agree that it is coercion to threaten but disagree that coercion negates free will. If you threaten me with violence unless I do what you want I retain the ability to defy you. My choice is not limited by your threats. Even if my response may differ because of them, it is still my choice to be swayed by your threats the choice is not removed by them. Or do you propose to define free will as the ability to choose whatever one wishes without any consequences resulting from that choice? Under that defintition, free will cannot exist ever for anyone. If we are to talk of free will, I think it is necessary to say that choices have consequences and free will simply means being able to make choices not being able to make choices without consequences.
Are we talking about existence, or simply about whether one should follow God or not? They are two different things.Secondly, I submit that the threat of punishment in hell for disbelief cannot be an effective coercive measure any more than the threat of being turned into a frog would be an effective coercive measure for a person trying to convince one to believe that they are the Wicked Witch of The West. Actually turning one into a frog would be much more effective. If one does not believe in a the existence of a being it hardly makes sense for them to be afraid that that being can harm them.
When the only difference between a Christian who tries to live their life in the best way they can, and is remorseful over their wrongs and a person who lives their life in a similar way is their belief - and the former goes to hell while the latter doesn't - then yes, regardless of whatever excuses that are made, it boils down to being punished for your lack of belief.Thirdly, No theistic religion that I know of contends that hell is a punishment for disbelief. They all seem to agree that hell is a punishment for bad behavior. Many Christians, not all, additionally contend that faith ( not simply belief) sets one free from the eternal consequences of bad behavior.
I disagree. I'm pretty sure there is no way I could force myself to believe the Earth was flat, unless presented with good evidence.
So you think you can choose your beliefs?
I don''t normally come across Christians who says they believe in God just because one day they decided to believe in him. They normally say they investigated it, or had an experience which made them believe.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?