Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
well since you decided to go with those who have never felt pain. You are ok with possibly condemning them to everlasting torment ?If people deserve pleasure, why not give them loads of it? If people deserve pain, give them loads of it! I would never just throw all people one way or the other, with no justification.
If people deserve pleasure, why not give them loads of it? If people deserve pain, give them loads of it! I would never just throw all people one way or the other, with no justification.
Let me keep the Dune analogy going.
First, I'm putting their hand in box #2.
Secondly, I'm hoping I get put in box #1.
When, in years to come, the people I've put in box #2 have grown soft from their indolence, I'll have been hardened by box #1. I'll create my own bliss at that point at their expense, TYVM. God created Box #1 to train the faithful. One does not oppose the will of God.
well since you decided to go with those who have never felt pain. You are ok with possibly condemning them to everlasting torment ?
Seems pretty cruel if not immoral to knowingly choose a path for someone that may lead them to horrible pain when there is a much better alternative.
On a similar thread. lets say your kids have a choice of having a scholarship to their chosen university that pays for everything or not having one, you could choose which they get. Would you refuse them the chance knowing that without it they may not get where they are trying?
Does anyone deserve eternal pain?
What do you even mean by "deserve"?
No im not, there is a chance based on who knows what that they may be placed in box 1 or 2. And in all likely hood they will be placed in box 1. And why would you want anyone to be punished for eternity? You seem to suggest that they will no doubt go to box #2 even though you dont know the conditions needed to get to 2. So I know you dont like the idea so your trying to wiggle out as much as possible but seriously. You have the choice. You would knowingly possibly condmem someone for eterentity to torture. Just so they may have the chance to appreciate bliss a little more?Nuh uh uh. Now you're changing the terms of the dilemma. There is a chance, based on their actions, that they get one or the other. Why not let them act freely, and let their choice decide their fate? That's all I'm doing.
Your other analogy is faulty. I'm not choosing anyone's fate. I'm putting them on a hill, and letting them choose which side to roll down.
Well, if someone willfully commits acts intended to produce no good, and actively harms others, and the only product of their having been alive is pain in other people's lives, I see no problem with tossing them to the flames.
No im not, there is a chance based on who knows what that they may be placed in box 1 or 2. And in all likely hood they will be placed in box 1. And why would you want anyone to be punished for eternity? You seem to suggest that they will no doubt go to box #2 even though you dont know the conditions needed to get to 2. So I know you dont like the idea so your trying to wiggle out as much as possible but seriously. You have the choice. You would knowingly possibly condmem someone for eterentity to torture. Just so they may have the chance to appreciate bliss a little more?
The analogy is apt. We have been given many ideas of what must be done to reach heaven. And by most accounts it is easier to reach hell than heaven. Now you would deem it ok to send one to a better than even chance of eventually ending up in hell when now you can ensure there place in heaven before anything else.This is where your analogy is breaking down. You're trying to create a dilemma which paints a theistic deity in a bad light based on your approximation of the situation.
If people do good their entire lives, without promise of reward, what should their reward be? How long would bliss last? Why should it not be forever?
On the flip side, if someone has made no effort to have a positive effect on the world around them, and has caused only pain, I see no reason to not punish them. If the purveyors of good are rewarded eternally, why should the purveyors of evil not be punished equally?
Also, they will not as you say "in all likelihood be placed in box 1". This implies that you have outside knowledge of the criteria which allots placement following their stint in box 3. You have no basis to judge where they will end up anymore than anyone but the person who set the criteria.
Some problems I still have - if I am deciding the fate of these people, how can I not know what the criteria is for them to end up in box 2?
Are we playing the role of God in this analogy, or humans judging humans?
If we are playing the role of God, you also need to define why we created people in the first place.
I still choose box 3.
You said that there IS criteria for getting rewarded with box 2 after 3, so placing someone in 3 isn't condemning them to torment. Through their own action/inaction they will be condemned.
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?