• 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.

What is the purpose behind an eternal hell?

food4thought

Loving truth
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2002
2,929
725
51
Watervliet, MI
✟406,829.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Does God talk to you and tell you good things to do? Are you incapable of doing good things entirely on your own? What does that say about someones self worth?

Yes. Entirely on my own... no. I need God to sustain existence and all that :) , but yes I am capable of acts of good. I do not hold to the view of total depravity that says humanity is incapable of any good apart from the direct help of God to do so... man is broken, but even a broken watch is right twice a day.

Was it good for him to ask Abraham to sacrifice his son? If I remember correctly, he had Issac tied to the alter and drew his knife. If you were driving today and saw a scene like this on the side of the road and the man said "God told me to do this. I'm proving my devotion to him" Would you carry on with your day or would you report this delusional man.

God tested Abraham, but never intended for him to complete the sacrifice. We live in a different time and covenant now, so your question lacks revelance... but yes I would report someone doing as you describe.

How do you know? What does God's voice sound like? Could you describe it in detail.

Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. "Do not be amazed that I said to you, 'You must be born again.' "The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit."
(John 3:5-8)

It is less a voice that I could describe to you and more like a thought that is not my own... difficult to describe.

How do you know that voice is God and not something you made up yourself? How does one determine this?

One instance of many: I am getting off work on a Friday, being relieved by a new employee that I have to stay over for to train. After training him I am in a real hurry to start my weekend. As I leave the job site a thought inside my mind starts repeating "go back". I shake it off (I was a new Christian) and continue to drive away, but He continues to repeat "go back" over and over. After arguing with Him for a time, I decided to go back thinking maybe it was a God thing. I get back and my boss is there talking with the new employee. Come to find out the new employee was a missionary home for a short time, and my boss was a Pastor! I had a great time of fellowship with them, very encouraging for a new believer.

That is the type of thing that has happened in my life that cuases me to believe that I have the Holy Spirit leading me when I will listen to Him.

Are you hearing voices in your head that aren't your own telling you to do things? This is called schizophrenia.

That is a sneaky little ad hominem there, and it is beneath you. There is a big difference between schizophrenia and being indwelt by the Spirit. Schizophrenics generally have other symptoms, and they're voices destroy their life, not enhance it.

This really makes you wonder, if God exists, why doesn't he stop these things? Certainly he has the power to say "Alright, that's enough, let's put a stop to this" But nope.....throughout human history, these types of things continue to happen and heaven watches with complete indifference (It seems more likely that it doesn't exist).

God is not indifferent. Again, He will not-- cannot force anyone to love Him, and many people are out there today who will one day be saved. Jesus will return at the perfect time.



This is what is called a survival instinct. What is truly bothersome is hearing some religious people look at all the negative in the world and think "Oh, Jesus will one day stop it" Yet....here we are. Perhaps it should be painfully obvious that nobody is coming to save us from ourselves. We live on a tiny spec of dust in the corner of an unimportant galaxy, orbiting around a rather uninteresting star. We are all in this together and should do our best to make the world a better place.

To me it is painfully obvious that we will not survive our own evil tendencies unless Someone comes to save us.

Ah yes, created sick and then ordered to be well. Where love is compulsory. You must love someone who you also must fear. A totalitarian dictatorship.

God has provided the mean to be made well, it is not His fault that you do not believe it.



No true Scotsman fallacy. How many times have you seen someone commit a "sin" ask for forgiveness and then turn around and do it again the next day. It strips you of your personal responsibility.

Again, Christians fail sometimes, but it is not a way of life for someone walking in the Spirit. Still, it is possible to be a Christian and be walking after our own sinful desires. I was not right to state it as I did, it was a fallacious argument.





So you would be okay if God told you that your child's murderer was rewarded with an eternal reward while your Child was condemned to your interpretation of hell just for not being convinced of his existence? This is a yes or no question.

Yes.

And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them, and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away." And He who sits on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new." And He *said, "Write, for these words are faithful and true."
(Revelation 21:3-5 NASB)


I love being alive too. I also know that someday I will be dead. It motivates me to enjoy the one life I am sure to get, live my life in the most positive way possible and do my best to leave it a better place than I found it. None of this requires a divine being.

I know that one day I will stand before my Creator and give an account for the things I have said and done, and this motivates me to live according to His leading.

But completely separating someone for all eternity is completely fine?

I admit to being uncomfortable with the concept of eternal punishment, but I trust that all will be made clear once I am face to face with my Redeemer.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You have a conscience that He placed in you. Yes, unbelief is the only sin that will not be forgiven at this present time.
Why would a benevolent god consider nonbelief sinful and worthy of damnation? Why is sincere doubt considered a crime?
He has given us the universe to demonstrate His existence and the Bible to explain why things are the way they are.
In what way does the universe demonstrate his existence?
His compassion and understanding is what keeps Him from putting an end to it all, because there are still people out there who will be saved.
Assuming that he is omniscient, he would know the best way in which to save each individual. Assuming that he is omnipotent, he would have the resources to do so, unless he has knowingly and purposefully created someone who cannot be saved. But if he has done that then he has created an individual solely for damnation, which would cast his omnibenevolence into doubt.
I have a conscience as well, so yes I am capable of determining right from wrong for the most part. The problem is that we do not always live up to our conscience, our consiences are in many ways corrupted by our environment and own sinful desires, and these selfish desires lead us to do things contrary to what is loving. Think of it this way: if there is no God, then all we have is something that has obviously failed to restrain mankind. If there is no God, then those who have the power to enforce their will upon the rest of us will continue to do so, and ultimately they will determine right from wrong according to what serves their purposes (as they already do in many countries). I would rather have a good, all knowing, all powerful God determining right and wrong... the bottom line is that God is trustworthy to act according to His own good character and nature, while mankind has demonstrated all through history that we are not trustworthy to have power.
How did you determine that his character and nature are good? Such an evaluation implies that you are judging his character/nature according to some other standard or criteria. But if his character and nature are the standard, as you seem to be saying, then claiming that they are "good" is equivalent to saying that he is himself.
We must choose love, or else it would not be love. Think about the implications of this... why does God not reveal Himself openly yet? Because then those who have not already chosen to love Him would be then forced to either obey Him (always act in others best interest) or be condemned. Love must be freely chosen, and because of that many people will choose freely to go the opposite direction, and that is their right, but there is no place in heaven for selfishness and greed. That is why the world is the way it is... God has given us a choice, and it must not- NO, cannot be coerced.
Revealing himself would not force anyone to love him. It would simply dispel the doubt surrounding his existence while still leaving open the option of love.
Yes, it is moral. No, your unbelief is not as bad to me as a serial killer. But your unbelief is enough to separate you from God if you reject His cure for your soul. None of us who are saved get what we deserve. We get mercy (not getting the condemnation we deserve) and grace (being forgiven, getting eternal life, etc.). Your choice... get what you deserve or get mercy and grace.
As Sam Harris and others have noticed, this system has nothing to do with moral accountability:
https://soundcloud.com/https%3A%2F%2Fsoundcloud.com%2Fsamharrisorg%2Fhow-to-talk-to-a-christian
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Davian
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
God is not indifferent. Again, He will not-- cannot force anyone to love Him, and many people are out there today who will one day be saved. Jesus will return at the perfect time.
Wouldn't the perfect time be after everyone is saved? Anything less would obviously be less than perfect as some portion of humanity would be damned. The perfect outcome is one in which no one is damned and all are saved.
 
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes. Entirely on my own... no. I need God to sustain existence and all that :) , but yes I am capable of acts of good. I do not hold to the view of total depravity that says humanity is incapable of any good apart from the direct help of God to do so... man is broken, but even a broken watch is right twice a day.



God tested Abraham, but never intended for him to complete the sacrifice. We live in a different time and covenant now, so your question lacks revelance... but yes I would report someone doing as you describe.



Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. "Do not be amazed that I said to you, 'You must be born again.' "The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit."
(John 3:5-8)

It is less a voice that I could describe to you and more like a thought that is not my own... difficult to describe.



One instance of many: I am getting off work on a Friday, being relieved by a new employee that I have to stay over for to train. After training him I am in a real hurry to start my weekend. As I leave the job site a thought inside my mind starts repeating "go back". I shake it off (I was a new Christian) and continue to drive away, but He continues to repeat "go back" over and over. After arguing with Him for a time, I decided to go back thinking maybe it was a God thing. I get back and my boss is there talking with the new employee. Come to find out the new employee was a missionary home for a short time, and my boss was a Pastor! I had a great time of fellowship with them, very encouraging for a new believer.

That is the type of thing that has happened in my life that cuases me to believe that I have the Holy Spirit leading me when I will listen to Him.



That is a sneaky little ad hominem there, and it is beneath you. There is a big difference between schizophrenia and being indwelt by the Spirit. Schizophrenics generally have other symptoms, and they're voices destroy their life, not enhance it.



God is not indifferent. Again, He will not-- cannot force anyone to love Him, and many people are out there today who will one day be saved. Jesus will return at the perfect time.





To me it is painfully obvious that we will not survive our own evil tendencies unless Someone comes to save us.



God has provided the mean to be made well, it is not His fault that you do not believe it.





Again, Christians fail sometimes, but it is not a way of life for someone walking in the Spirit. Still, it is possible to be a Christian and be walking after our own sinful desires. I was not right to state it as I did, it was a fallacious argument.







Yes.

And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them, and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away." And He who sits on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new." And He *said, "Write, for these words are faithful and true."
(Revelation 21:3-5 NASB)




I know that one day I will stand before my Creator and give an account for the things I have said and done, and this motivates me to live according to His leading.



I admit to being uncomfortable with the concept of eternal punishment, but I trust that all will be made clear once I am face to face with my Redeemer.
His sheep know His voice.
 
Upvote 0

anonymous person

Well-Known Member
Jul 21, 2015
3,326
507
40
✟75,394.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Wouldn't the perfect time be after everyone is saved? Anything less would obviously be less than perfect as some portion of humanity would be damned. The perfect outcome is one in which no one is damned and all are saved.
The question assumes everyone would be saved to begin with.

Secondly, the notion of degrees of perfection is a self referentially incoherent idea. There is no "less perfect" or "more perfect" anything.

Thirdly, your argument assumes God if He creates, must create a perfect world. You give no reason whatsoever to think this and have given no clear definition of what "perfect" means within the context in which you are using the term. I see no reason at all to think there is a cap or upper bound on value when it comes to the quality of possible worlds. Why cannot the range of value of quality of possible worlds be infinite, extending on from better to better to better on into infinity?
 
Upvote 0

JonFromMinnesota

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2015
2,171
1,608
Minnesota
✟60,266.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Yes, unbelief is the only sin that will not be forgiven at this present time.

If you died and was face to face with Odin. Would it be fair to punish you for all eternity simply for not believing?

He has given us the universe to demonstrate His existence and the Bible to explain why things are the way they are.

"God exists because the bible and universe exists" is a circular argument. It doesn't demonstrate anything. Try again.

The problem is that we do not always live up to our conscience, our consiences are in many ways corrupted by our environment and own sinful desires, and these selfish desires lead us to do things contrary to what is loving.

Yes, in the ordinary moral universe, the good will do the best they can the worst will do the worst they can. Are you capable of being a good person without thinking someone is watching you?

If there is no God, then those who have the power to enforce their will upon the rest of us will continue to do so, and ultimately they will determine right from wrong according to what serves their purposes (as they already do in many countries).

Would you support a Christian theocracy?

Think about the implications of this... why does God not reveal Himself openly yet? Because then those who have not already chosen to love Him would be then forced to either obey Him (always act in others best interest) or be condemned.

Is compulsory love moral? "Obey me or I will condemn you" That isn't the behavior of someone deserving of respect.

God has given us a choice, and it must not- NO, cannot be coerced.

Does an ultimatum remove someone's responsibility? It already is coerced. Believe in me or I will condemn you for all eternity. That doesn't sound like a choice to me. That sounds like a threat.

God, by choosing to create beings with the capacity to love, has put Himself in a dilemma.

What makes you so sure? It sounds like you are projecting and doing mental gymnastics in order to make sense of a brutal, human sacrifice. Why would an omniscient being put themselves in a dilemma? Again....this sounds man made.

So out of His great love for us He devised the substitutionary attonement of an innocent sacrifice on our behalf. It is the only way that God could satisfy His justice without condemning all of mankind.

How could it be the only way if God is omnipotent? You're making it up in your head what you want God to be.

So God came down to earth as himself, to have himself sacrificed to himself to save you from himself. This is incomprehensible nonsense.

Think of it this way... God created beings with the capacity to love freely, but we took that freedom and went our own wicked way down through the centuries, resulting in countless horrors (great and small) that demand justice against every single soul that has ever lived.

Which he knew would happen in the first place since he is omniscient. Therefore, he is ultimately responsible for the horrors. Create you sick, command you to be well. Nonsense, nonsense, nonsense.

He basically punished Himself for creating us in order that we might live eternally with Him in love relationship. That is how much God loves us.

So God is an omniscient being.....He knew that we wouldn't be able to live up to impossible expectations. He knew that it would require himself to punish himself. This comes off as "I love my creation but I know they won't live up to my expectations so this is going to require me to sacrifice myself to myself in the most brutal way imaginable. But this is the only way to show I love them" How does this make any sense to you? This is utter nonsense.

God is three persons in One Being... not the same person. That is what the trinity is, a mystery to us.

The word "trinity" doesn't appear one single time in the bible. This is not a mystery, it is obviously nonsense.

Anyways, God's wrath is only irrational in your mind. Look at the horrors we have been speaking of... really let yourself think about it! All of this stems from selfish rebellion against the loving will of an entirely perfectly good God.

You should really think about what you are saying. I could name several horrors that were caused by religion. We can even look right in the bible.

1 Samuel 15:3 "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."

Would you agree this is a horror? But is it a good thing because God commanded it? If you think so, then you are morally bankrupt. The people who would be committing this would think they are doing good because God commanded it. This is utter insanity. What about the Crusades? The Inquisition, The Holocaust. Hitler's own words "I am doing the work of the Lord" You should evaluate the implications of what you are saying.

There is also some anthropomorphism involved because God cannot be fully described by human language. But His love is real, and so is His wrath. Both are true and right considering the reality of what humanity could be, yet is

Yet, here you are describing what you think God is in great detail.

But your unbelief is enough to separate you from God if you reject His cure for your soul.

How can I reject something that I do not believe exists? Who else tries to say to you are sick but offers a magical cure? Oh yeah....snake oil salesmen.

Your choice... get what you deserve or get mercy and grace.

Any God who has to threaten his creation is not a God worth worshiping.


What does God's voice sound like? Describe it in detail. How can you be sure it is an actual God talking to you or you are just hearing what you want to hear?

I do not hold to the view of total depravity that says humanity is incapable of any good apart from the direct help of God to do so... man is broken, but even a broken watch is right twice a day.

So you can admit you do not need a God in order to be a good person but you need a God because you are not perfect? How does this make any sense? Are you incapable of being responsible for your own actions? I can concede that we're not perfect beings but that doesn't mean we need someone to sacrifice themselves. That is scapegoating. If you wrong someone, do your best to correct that wrong, accept the consequences of your actions and work towards becoming a better person. Are you capable of this? If yes, then you don't need to believe in a God.

God tested Abraham, but never intended for him to complete the sacrifice.

So it's okay to psychologically torture a father and his son just as so long as you don't intend to complete the kill? This is obvious sadistic behavior.

We live in a different time and covenant now, so your question lacks revelance... but yes I would report someone doing as you describe.

Of course you would report someone doing as I described. You can easily recognize that it is morally reprehensible. Why are you going to the "It was a different time" argument? Are you saying that someone saying that God told him to sacrifice his son is perfectly fine because it was a different century? That is like saying that slavery in America was morally fine because it was during a different time. Surely you can recognize what nonsense this type of reasoning is.

It is less a voice that I could describe to you and more like a thought that is not my own... difficult to describe.

How do you determine the thought was not your own? How do you objectively verify this?

That is the type of thing that has happened in my life that cuases me to believe that I have the Holy Spirit leading me when I will listen to Him.


Argument from personal experience fallacy. While that is a nice story, good feelings don't make something true. If I were to tell you I had a personal experience of being abducted by aliens who shared wisdom with me and there was a time when I met someone who had a similar experience and we shared a fellowship, would you believe me? Or would you point out my confirmation bias? What if a Hindu shared a similar story to theirs but their God in this situation would be Krishna, Vishnu, etc? How do you know which one of you is right?

God is not indifferent. Jesus will return at the perfect time.

You're projecting again. God could stop the terrible suffering of innocent children anytime but nope....it continues. 2000 years and still waiting.

To me it is painfully obvious that we will not survive our own evil tendencies unless Someone comes to save us.

That doesn't mean there is someone that will save us. Shouldn't we be proactive in making the world a better place instead of waiting on a savior that likely does not exist?

Christian and be walking after our own sinful desires.

What would you consider a sinful "desire"? That doesn't make much sense to me. Is it really a sin if it doesn't hurt anyone? Again, if you wrong someone, do your best to correct that wrong, accept the consequences and work towards becoming a better person. No God is required for this.


Really? Could you look a loved one in the eyes at this moment and say to them "If you were murdered in cold blood and your murderer goes to heaven and you go to hell, I won't be sad about it at all"? If I was your son and you felt this way, I would never talk to you again.

I know that one day I will stand before my Creator and give an account for the things I have said and done, and this motivates me to live according to His leading.

So you are motivated to live a certain way because you think you know that someone is going to judge you? That is no way to live a life in my opinion. This God is omniscient right? He would already know how he is going to judge you. So, what is the point of giving account to things you have said or done? This is a kangaroo court. What an utter waste of time and an absolute insult to your humanity.

I admit to being uncomfortable with the concept of eternal punishment, but I trust that all will be made clear once I am face to face with my Redeemer.

And if it turned out to be that this God tortures people for eternity, would you show this God any respect?













 
Upvote 0

anonymous person

Well-Known Member
Jul 21, 2015
3,326
507
40
✟75,394.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
If you died and was face to face with Odin. Would it be fair to punish you for all eternity simply for not believing?



"God exists because the bible and universe exists" is a circular argument. It doesn't demonstrate anything. Try again.



Yes, in the ordinary moral universe, the good will do the best they can the worst will do the worst they can. Are you capable of being a good person without thinking someone is watching you?



Would you support a Christian theocracy?



Is compulsory love moral? "Obey me or I will condemn you" That isn't the behavior of someone deserving of respect.



Does an ultimatum remove someone's responsibility? It already is coerced. Believe in me or I will condemn you for all eternity. That doesn't sound like a choice to me. That sounds like a threat.



What makes you so sure? It sounds like you are projecting and doing mental gymnastics in order to make sense of a brutal, human sacrifice. Why would an omniscient being put themselves in a dilemma? Again....this sounds man made.



How could it be the only way if God is omnipotent? You're making it up in your head what you want God to be.

So God came down to earth as himself, to have himself sacrificed to himself to save you from himself. This is incomprehensible nonsense.



Which he knew would happen in the first place since he is omniscient. Therefore, he is ultimately responsible for the horrors. Create you sick, command you to be well. Nonsense, nonsense, nonsense.



So God is an omniscient being.....He knew that we wouldn't be able to live up to impossible expectations. He knew that it would require himself to punish himself. This comes off as "I love my creation but I know they won't live up to my expectations so this is going to require me to sacrifice myself to myself in the most brutal way imaginable. But this is the only way to show I love them" How does this make any sense to you? This is utter nonsense.



The word "trinity" doesn't appear one single time in the bible. This is not a mystery, it is obviously nonsense.



You should really think about what you are saying. I could name several horrors that were caused by religion. We can even look right in the bible.

1 Samuel 15:3 "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."

Would you agree this is a horror? But is it a good thing because God commanded it? If you think so, then you are morally bankrupt. The people who would be committing this would think they are doing good because God commanded it. This is utter insanity. What about the Crusades? The Inquisition, The Holocaust. Hitler's own words "I am doing the work of the Lord" You should evaluate the implications of what you are saying.



Yet, here you are describing what you think God is in great detail.



How can I reject something that I do not believe exists? Who else tries to say to you are sick but offers a magical cure? Oh yeah....snake oil salesmen.



Any God who has to threaten his creation is not a God worth worshiping.



What does God's voice sound like? Describe it in detail. How can you be sure it is an actual God talking to you or you are just hearing what you want to hear?



So you can admit you do not need a God in order to be a good person but you need a God because you are not perfect? How does this make any sense? Are you incapable of being responsible for your own actions? I can concede that we're not perfect beings but that doesn't mean we need someone to sacrifice themselves. That is scapegoating. If you wrong someone, do your best to correct that wrong, accept the consequences of your actions and work towards becoming a better person. Are you capable of this? If yes, then you don't need to believe in a God.



So it's okay to psychologically torture a father and his son just as so long as you don't intend to complete the kill? This is obvious sadistic behavior.



Of course you would report someone doing as I described. You can easily recognize that it is morally reprehensible. Why are you going to the "It was a different time" argument? Are you saying that someone saying that God told him to sacrifice his son is perfectly fine because it was a different century? That is like saying that slavery in America was morally fine because it was during a different time. Surely you can recognize what nonsense this type of reasoning is.



How do you determine the thought was not your own? How do you objectively verify this?




Argument from personal experience fallacy. While that is a nice story, good feelings don't make something true. If I were to tell you I had a personal experience of being abducted by aliens who shared wisdom with me and there was a time when I met someone who had a similar experience and we shared a fellowship, would you believe me? Or would you point out my confirmation bias? What if a Hindu shared a similar story to theirs but their God in this situation would be Krishna, Vishnu, etc? How do you know which one of you is right?



You're projecting again. God could stop the terrible suffering of innocent children anytime but nope....it continues. 2000 years and still waiting.



That doesn't mean there is someone that will save us. Shouldn't we be proactive in making the world a better place instead of waiting on a savior that likely does not exist?



What would you consider a sinful "desire"? That doesn't make much sense to me. Is it really a sin if it doesn't hurt anyone? Again, if you wrong someone, do your best to correct that wrong, accept the consequences and work towards becoming a better person. No God is required for this.



Really? Could you look a loved one in the eyes at this moment and say to them "If you were murdered in cold blood and your murderer goes to heaven and you go to hell, I won't be sad about it at all"? If I was your son and you felt this way, I would never talk to you again.



So you are motivated to live a certain way because you think you know that someone is going to judge you? That is no way to live a life in my opinion. This God is omniscient right? He would already know how he is going to judge you. So, what is the point of giving account to things you have said or done? This is a kangaroo court. What an utter waste of time and an absolute insult to your humanity.



And if it turned out to be that this God tortures people for eternity, would you show this God any respect?












God does not offer threats. He offers warnings. He makes promises too.

There is a difference.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
...
Thirdly, your argument assumes God if He creates, must create a perfect world. You give no reason whatsoever to think this and have given no clear definition of what "perfect" means within the context in which you are using the term. I see no reason at all to think there is a cap or upper bound on value when it comes to the quality of possible worlds. Why cannot the range of value of quality of possible worlds be infinite, extending on from better to better to better on into infinity?
Which would also allow for the religionists' special pleading to go on into infinity...
 
  • Like
Reactions: bhsmte
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Is that so?

Yes.

So you don't think that believing that there are no gods is not based on your reality?

Atheism is not "believing there are no gods".
Atheism is "not believing that there are gods".

I'm sorry if you can't understand the difference.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Is it not your a priori belief that nothing can be known to be true unless it can be demonstrated to be true?

No, that's not a belief.

And for clarity, my degree of certainty that something is true, is directly derived from the quantity and quality of the evidence.

Your a priori beliefs include that nothing that can not be demonstrated as true is true.

No, that's not my belief at all.

You agree that somethings might be true but that you can't know.

Sure. Don't you?

That however, shows that you have an a priori belief that the universe is orderly and comprehensible. That we can depend on it to be in the same way today and tomorrow.

Well, it's an assumption, yes.
I assume that the unviverse is real and that it is consistent enough to learn something about it, yes. So do you. Because when you jump, your knowledge of the universe informs you that you will fall back to the earth instead of shooting into space.

In fact, there is a math formula that describes the escape velocity, to in fact shoot into space. And i'll happily bet large amounts of cash that when we apply that formula, we will in fact shoot things into space. Today, tomorrow and next week.


We reject other religions not by default but because they contradict what we have confirmed as true in our beliefs.

Right. And by doing so, you adhere dogmatically to your a priori beliefs.
Your beliefs could be wrong, though.

That is simply false. Christianity is a religion based on reason. Faith is very misunderstood by unbelievers.

Right, right... because "unbelievers" would be "believers" if they understood it, right?
Indeed, everybody that doesn't agree, doesn't agree because they "misunderstand". It is absolutely impossible that they DO understand, but still remain unconvinced.
Ha?

But all truth can not be shown or demonstrated as you have admitted.

When something can't be shown to be correct, there is no rational justification to believe it - even if it turns out to be true after all. The moment one has rational justification to accept something to be true, is the moment it can be shown to be true (with a reasonable degree of certainty).
 
  • Like
Reactions: bhsmte
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The question assumes everyone would be saved to begin with.
Wouldn't that be the perfect outcome?
Secondly, the notion of degrees of perfection is a self referentially incoherent idea. There is no "less perfect" or "more perfect" anything.
I said "less than perfect" not "less perfect."
Thirdly, your argument assumes God if He creates, must create a perfect world. You give no reason whatsoever to think this and have given no clear definition of what "perfect" means within the context in which you are using the term.
You are quite simply wrong. I clearly indicated what "perfect" means in the context in which I used the term: it means that everyone is saved and none are damned. Can Yahweh, who is ostensibly omnipotent, not accomplish this perfect outcome or does he not care to?
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
God does not offer threats. He offers warnings. He makes promises too.

There is a difference.
If it is Yahweh we are discussing, then it is the threat of Hell for those who do not obsequiously reciprocate his "love."
 
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes.



Atheism is not "believing there are no gods".
Atheism is "not believing that there are gods".

I'm sorry if you can't understand the difference.
I understand the difference. I will remember the distinction in the future.
 
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No, that's not a belief.
Very well then, you agree that Truth, can be demonstrated is not a valid statement as there is some truth that exists that can not be demonstrated, correct?

And for clarity, my degree of certainty that something is true, is directly derived from the quantity and quality of the evidence.
I believe that for the majority of people who value truth and live in a Science rich society that truth is not just belief without justification. In fact, I would say that most people believe what they believe not in spite of justification but in fact due to it.



No, that's not my belief at all.
We are in agreement then, which means that bshmte made an invalid statement. A valid statement would have been: to arrive at any certainty in regard to truth, one must be able to arrive at that certainty by the quantity and quality of the evidence that supports it. Do you agree?



Sure. Don't you?
Yes, which is why I said bshmte's statement was invalid.



Well, it's an assumption, yes.
I assume that the unviverse is real and that it is consistent enough to learn something about it, yes. So do you. Because when you jump, your knowledge of the universe informs you that you will fall back to the earth instead of shooting into space.

In fact, there is a math formula that describes the escape velocity, to in fact shoot into space. And i'll happily bet large amounts of cash that when we apply that formula, we will in fact shoot things into space. Today, tomorrow and next week.
So you would agree that there are a priori beliefs one must have to do science at all.




Right. And by doing so, you adhere dogmatically to your a priori beliefs.
Your beliefs could be wrong, though.
I don't adhere dogmatically to my Christian beliefs due to an a priori position as I was not always a Christian and thus had different beliefs before becoming a Christian. I came to be a Christian due to evidence in my life that justified my belief in being one. One can only be wrong if what one believes is not true. The certainty of what one believes determines what one believes but truth is truth. I could be wrong but if I am wrong, someone or something of great power, who has the ability to manipulate and control the natural world on command is deceiving me into believing that He is the God of the Bible. Now, if He is deluded into believing He is the God of the Bible, I would be unable to determine that with any certainty; I would also be unable to determine with any certainty if He knows He is not the God of the Bible but is able to do what the God of the Bible says He can and has done and claims to be the God of the Bible. Then some other entity is pretending to be God of the Bible and is deceiving me. Either way, someone with great power and with capabilities beyond mere mortals is interacting with the world and me as well. Do I believe that this should be convincing to you? No. You have not experienced this, nor is there a way that personal experiences should influence anyone. But having this experience and then having evidence that confirms it brings me to a high degree of certainty that what I believe is confirmed and true.


Right, right... because "unbelievers" would be "believers" if they understood it, right?
Indeed, everybody that doesn't agree, doesn't agree because they "misunderstand". It is absolutely impossible that they DO understand, but still remain unconvinced.
Faith is not based on something you don't know is true but something you know is true but can't prove. Just like you have faith that the universe is orderly and will be the same tomorrow as it is today is faith. It is not "blind" faith but faith based on your experience that you can trust tomorrow being as it is today. The same is true of Christian faith. It is based on your experience that God can be trusted.




When something can't be shown to be correct, there is no rational justification to believe it - even if it turns out to be true after all. The moment one has rational justification to accept something to be true, is the moment it can be shown to be true (with a reasonable degree of certainty).
That is why we use evidence that can be shown to be correct to justify our beliefs. But evidence can be interpreted in biased ways.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Very well then, you agree that Truth, can be demonstrated is not a valid statement as there is some truth that exists that can not be demonstrated, correct?

How is it possible that after all these posts, you still manage to misunderstand this very basic idea....

Once more: something can not be known to be true if it can't be shown to be so.

I believe that for the majority of people who value truth and live in a Science rich society that truth is not just belief without justification. In fact, I would say that most people believe what they believe not in spite of justification but in fact due to it.

I disagree. I think you will encounter a LOT of people who will profess "belief" in something without proper justification. They'll believe things for fallacious reasons. For example, I know a lot of christians and muslims who only identify themselves as such because that's how they were raised. Not because they have actual rational and reasonable justification for believing those things.

We are in agreement then, which means that bshmte made an invalid statement.

I don't know what statement you are refering to.

A valid statement would have been: to arrive at any certainty in regard to truth, one must be able to arrive at that certainty by the quantity and quality of the evidence that supports it. Do you agree?

That sounds reasonable, yes.
That also falls in line with the statement "you can't know what is true, if the thing that is true can't be shown to be true". Which is what I've been repeating for several posts now.

So you would agree that there are a priori beliefs one must have to do science at all.

These are not really a priori beliefs. They are rather part of the 3 basal assumptions that everyone must make:
1. reality is real
2. reality is consistent enough so that we can learn about it
3. models with predictive capacity are better then models without such capacity

Without those 3 basal assumptions, you can't even conclude that jumping from the Eiffel Tower will result in certain death.

One can only be wrong if what one believes is not true.

But off course, one doesn't know in advance if ones beliefs are wrong.

The certainty of what one believes determines what one believes but truth is truth. I could be wrong but if I am wrong, someone or something of great power, who has the ability to manipulate and control the natural world on command is deceiving me into believing that He is the God of the Bible.

Or.... you are just mistaken about such power existing at all.
See? Your dogma is showing.

Now, if He is deluded into believing He is the God of the Bible, I would be unable to determine that with any certainty; I would also be unable to determine with any certainty if He knows He is not the God of the Bible but is able to do what the God of the Bible says He can and has done and claims to be the God of the Bible. Then some other entity is pretending to be God of the Bible and is deceiving me.

Or..... your deception is in the idea that such an entity exists at all....


Either way, someone with great power and with capabilities beyond mere mortals is interacting with the world and me as well.

And it is absolutely impossible that you are wrong about that?

Do I believe that this should be convincing to you? No.

Well... at least that's a start....

You have not experienced this, nor is there a way that personal experiences should influence anyone. But having this experience and then having evidence that confirms it brings me to a high degree of certainty that what I believe is confirmed and true.

Assuming that you are actually correct about what you experienced, that is...

Faith is not based on something you don't know is true but something you know is true but can't prove.

Aaaaaaaand we're back to square one.....

How can you KNOW that X is true, if it can't be shown to be true?

Just like you have faith that the universe is orderly and will be the same tomorrow as it is today is faith

No, I don't have "faith" that this is the case.
Instead, it's a reasonable assumption, based on the commonly observed reality by all of us.

I can hold my keys in the air in a vacuum and drop them, and they will fall to the earth at 9.81m per second per second. Every. Single. Time.
Not a single time will they instead shoot into space.

This is not just some "faith" that I have. It's a verifiable reality.

It is not "blind" faith but faith based on your experience that you can trust tomorrow being as it is today.

Again, I wouldn't use the word "faith".

The same is true of Christian faith. It is based on your experience that God can be trusted.

See, this is why I wouldn't use the word "faith".
I can actually demonstrate to you that the universe is pretty consistent in its workings.

You, on the other hand, can't demonstrate to me that your god has any effect or manifestation whatsoever. Which is exactly why you require "faith" to believe it.

That is why we use evidence that can be shown to be correct to justify our beliefs. But evidence can be interpreted in biased ways.

If a piece of evidence can be used to BOTH demonstrate AND falsify an idea, then it isn't evidence at all.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
...
One can only be wrong if what one believes is not true. The certainty of what one believes determines what one believes but truth is truth.
..if we are talking of "truth" where is has the state of being "true", and not just a closely held personal belief.
I could be wrong but if I am wrong, someone or something of great power, who has the ability to manipulate and control the natural world on command is deceiving me into believing that He is the God of the Bible.
If all it needs to do is alter your perception of the world, that can simply be explained by your subconscious.
Now, if He is deluded into believing He is the God of the Bible, I would be unable to determine that with any certainty;
Particularly if you are deluded into thinking that this is the God of the Bible influencing your perception, and not your subconscious.
I would also be unable to determine with any certainty if He knows He is not the God of the Bible but is able to do what the God of the Bible says He can and has done and claims to be the God of the Bible.
You should, at the very least, be able to show to others that you are contact with some sort of 'entity' outside of your own mind, should you not, if this 'entity' "is able to do what the God of the Bible says He can"? But you cannot do that, correct?
Then some other entity is pretending to be God of the Bible and is deceiving me.
The easiest person to deceive is ourselves.
Either way, someone with great power and with capabilities beyond mere mortals is interacting with the world and me as well.
Give us an example of this interaction, that specifically points to this "God"-like thing.
Do I believe that this should be convincing to you? No.
Then you have no grounds to refer to it as evidence, or as being true.
You have not experienced this, nor is there a way that personal experiences should influence anyone. But having this experience and then having evidence that confirms it brings me to a high degree of certainty that what I believe is confirmed and true.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman
Faith is not based on something you don't know is true but something you know is true but can't prove.
Okay.
Just like you have faith that the universe is orderly and will be the same tomorrow as it is today is faith.
Yet that can be "proven" (evidenced), as we can look the past record of the universe behaving in a predictable manner.
It is not "blind" faith but faith based on your experience that you can trust tomorrow being as it is today.
How do we test your "God" in the same fashion as the universe?
The same is true of Christian faith.
Not at all, if you fail to provide a means of testing your "God".
It is based on your experience that God can be trusted.
Trusted to do what? Be consistent with what you already believe?
That is why we use evidence that can be shown to be correct to justify our beliefs.
What do you mean, "shown to be correct"? As is "tested"? How do we test your evidence, to what hypothesis?
But evidence can be interpreted in biased ways.
Indeed, which is why one should employ methodologies that reduce bias. But those are typically unfriendly to "gods", yours in particular, correct?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bhsmte
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How is it possible that after all these posts, you still manage to misunderstand this very basic idea....

Once more: something can not be known to be true if it can't be shown to be so.
Even if we do experiments and the evidence supports a certain hypothesis, we can not Know it to be true. We have greater certainty and in some cases we have determined something is most probably true but we really can't be 100% in many things.



I disagree. I think you will encounter a LOT of people who will profess "belief" in something without proper justification. They'll believe things for fallacious reasons. For example, I know a lot of christians and muslims who only identify themselves as such because that's how they were raised. Not because they have actual rational and reasonable justification for believing those things.
Well that is certainly true, there are those who do not use actual rational reason to believe a lot of things. It isn't just true of religions in fact.



I don't know what statement you are refering to.
The statement that got this discussion going? "Truth, can be demonstrated." bshmte



That sounds reasonable, yes.
That also falls in line with the statement "you can't know what is true, if the thing that is true can't be shown to be true". Which is what I've been repeating for several posts now.
It doesn't matter, not all truth can be demonstrated. That was the point.



These are not really a priori beliefs. They are rather part of the 3 basal assumptions that everyone must make:
1. reality is real
2. reality is consistent enough so that we can learn about it
3. models with predictive capacity are better then models without such capacity

Without those 3 basal assumptions, you can't even conclude that jumping from the Eiffel Tower will result in certain death.
How does this not apply:
  1. relating to or denoting reasoning or knowledge that proceeds from theoretical deduction rather than from observation or experience.
    "a priori assumptions about human nature"
    synonyms: theoretical, deduced, deductive, inferred, postulated, suppositional
    "a priori reasoning"
adverb
  1. 1.
    in a way based on theoretical deduction rather than empirical observation.
    "sexuality may be a factor, but it cannot be assumed a priori"
    synonyms: theoretically, deductively, scientifically
    "the results cannot be predicted a priori"



But off course, one doesn't know in advance if ones beliefs are wrong.
True, that is why we use evidence and reasoning.



Or.... you are just mistaken about such power existing at all.
See? Your dogma is showing.
No, it has nothing to do with dogma. It has everything to do with the necessity of something or someone being able to manipulate the natural world by command. I could not be mistaken in that element of my experience.



Or..... your deception is in the idea that such an entity exists at all....
How in your opinion would that be possible?




And it is absolutely impossible that you are wrong about that?
I don't know how?



Well... at least that's a start....
It simply is the way it is.



Assuming that you are actually correct about what you experienced, that is...
I am. There are numerous examples and I wasn't the only person to witness them.



Aaaaaaaand we're back to square one.....

How can you KNOW that X is true, if it can't be shown to be true?
Are you telling me that you don't believe something is true even though you would be unable to show it to be true? IN what way do you determine everything you believe is true?



No, I don't have "faith" that this is the case.
Instead, it's a reasonable assumption, based on the commonly observed reality by all of us.
No, you have faith that it is a reasonable assumption, and you believe that since it is commonly observed by all of us that it is true.

I can hold my keys in the air in a vacuum and drop them, and they will fall to the earth at 9.81m per second per second. Every. Single. Time.
Not a single time will they instead shoot into space.
Right, which is better explained in a theistic worldview than an atheist worldview.

This is not just some "faith" that I have. It's a verifiable reality.
How do you verify that gravity will exist in the same way it has in our experience tomorrow?



Again, I wouldn't use the word "faith".
Faith is confidence or trust in a person or thing. Is that not what you are doing? Having confidence or trust in a thing?



See, this is why I wouldn't use the word "faith".
I can actually demonstrate to you that the universe is pretty consistent in its workings.
You can not demonstrate that it will be tomorrow.

You, on the other hand, can't demonstrate to me that your god has any effect or manifestation whatsoever. Which is exactly why you require "faith" to believe it.
That simply is untrue. There are many many confirmations that have nothing to do with faith.



If a piece of evidence can be used to BOTH demonstrate AND falsify an idea, then it isn't evidence at all.
Yes, that would be the law of non-contradiction which is better explained in theism than atheism.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0