Your argument against "many paths to God"

[Freodin]

People choose who to serve here on earth,
not after they die - then it is too late.

This claim is, in fact, a perfect reason to reject the whole concept of Christian salvation doctrine.

Within the limits of the concept of "choice" - for example, that you have to be aware of alternatives to make a choice - the prime factor is that a conscious agent can always make a choice. It is only other agents - conscious or not - that can deny the choser the outcome of their choice.

In the case of an omnipotent loving deity being this "other agent", such a denial of choice must be arbitrary... and that is incompatible with the idea of an omnipotent loving deity.

 

[Adstar]

I would like to see a logical argument for that. Especially one that cannot be used to argue that this "One God" does not have a "Will" for mankind... or anything.


Of course you then would have to go into the much more difficult task to find out if such a message was indeed received and followed by anyone.


Without making the argument - only saying that it can be made - this isn't reasonable or reasoned.

The argument i was giving to the opening poster was a counter argument to the ""Many paths to God position"".. which is held by people who believe in some kind of God and believe that people can achieve an eternal relationship with Him via any religion that currently exists..

So the argument was designed for Theists who do not believe there is only one Way to God..

It is not designed for atheists like yourself who do not even believe in the existence of God.. The argument is only of use if given to a person who believes God or gods exist..

 

[cloudyday2]

This couldn't be more wrong. The 9/11 hijackers knew that they were paying the ultimate price for their faith. However, they were not in a position to know for a fact that their beliefs were false. The disciples of Christ, as the argument goes, were in a position to know for a fact that Jesus either did or didn't rise from the dead. If he didn't, and they were making it up, why would they willfully die for their lie?

So seeing the resurrected Jesus is the entire crux of the argument, and you absolutely cannot say it is unimportant.

That's a good point if the central claim of Christianity is the literal Resurrection of Jesus. I don't think that this is the central claim though. The central claim of Christianity is the collection of personal spiritual experiences of each believer. The "why die for a lie" argument can then be applied to Christian martyrs from any period who were given an opportunity to recant their beliefs. (I suppose that there are some Christians who see Christianity simply as faith in the events recorded in the Gospel with no subsequent activity of God. They are probably a minority though.)

I basically agree with what you wrote, but I think the "why die for a lie" is too narrowly focused. The argument is wrong, because it assumes that a falsehood can only result from a lie. Christianity can be false without any secret conspiracy of liars behind the falsehood. And the physical Resurrection is not a necessity for Christianity to be true. Jesus can be "the way the light and the truth" with His bones still lying the ground somewhere. The empty tomb is just icing on the cake.

It's hard to attack or defend Christianity, because Christianity means so many different things to different people. You made some good points, but I think the whole "why die for a lie" argument is too narrow-minded.

 

[cloudyday2]

I've discussed this with my Christian partner, she says it's so because the bible says so, and that's it. I always say that to me, as a non believer, IF i'm wrong and there is a god it will be the same god for all humanity. I cannot envisage that an all powerful god who can simply "think" the entire universe into existence would be so cruel as to deny eternal life to 70%+ of HIS creation just on the basis of what they were taught as children, or the location they were born. Personally I don't believe that if this god exists he will require puny humans to worship him in the correct manner or be thrown into the lake of fire for eternity. It would be remarkable that eternal life is dependant upon just happening to know about and then believe in this person from an obscure corner of the planet, given the nature and incredible power of this creator god. That for me is the essence of "many paths to god". If there were one god with one path to him, he would have made it a lot more obvious and a lot easier to find.

That's a good case against Christianity being the only path to God.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

People choose who to serve here on earth,
not after they die - then it is too late.

That wasn't an answer to my question. Why should I believe in an afterlife?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That wasn't an answer to my question. Why should I believe in an afterlife?

For you, it seems, it doesn't matter if there is an afterlife or not.
If that is so, then, for you, there's no need to think about this nor to worry about this.
Just remember you often were warned while you were alive, after you die is too late (and terrible consequences) to change the judgment you receive - it is final.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That's a good case against Christianity being the only path to God.

The way to destruction has, keeps and gathers a lot of followers - mankind has a lot of so-called "good case(s)" against Christianity,
all of them fatal, and with terrible consequences..

 

[Freodin]

The argument i was giving to the opening poster was a counter argument to the ""Many paths to God position"".. which is held by people who believe in some kind of God and believe that people can achieve an eternal relationship with Him via any religion that currently exists..

So the argument was designed for Theists who do not believe there is only one Way to God..

Even in this case, you should present your argument. Even someone who believes in deities, or in One God, is not required to accept you simply on the claim that such an argument can be made. Make it, please.

It is not designed for atheists like yourself who do not even believe in the existence of God.. The argument is only of use if given to a person who believes God or gods exist..

That is not how an "argument" works. In any logical arguement, there are some assumptions, called "premises". The argument starts with these premises assumed to be correct.

There is no problem for an atheist to assume that there is a god, or even that there is only One God. There is no need to "believe" in a premise, only to assume that it is correct.

So here I am: agreeing with you, for the sake of this logical argument, that there is only One God (and nothing more or any further assumptions about this One God).

So, without any condescencion or diverting: please present your logic argument that, if there is One God, they would have a will/plan/goal for all of humanity, and a specific plan on top of that.

 

[HereIStand]

But were all the violent deaths due to their belief in Jesus as saviour? My understanding is that they were not, so they cannot be called martyrs?

All the violent deaths were executions because of their missionary work as Christians, which was based on their belief in Jesus as Saviour.

 

[Adstar]

Even in this case, you should present your argument. Even someone who believes in deities, or in One God, is not required to accept you simply on the claim that such an argument can be made. Make it, please.

It is not designed for atheists like yourself who do not even believe in the existence of God.. The argument is only of use if given to a person who believes God or gods exist..

That is not how an "argument" works. In any logical arguement, there are some assumptions, called "premises". The argument starts with these premises assumed to be correct.

There is no problem for an atheist to assume that there is a god, or even that there is only One God. There is no need to "believe" in a premise, only to assume that it is correct.

So here I am: agreeing with you, for the sake of this logical argument, that there is only One God (and nothing more or any further assumptions about this One God).

So, without any condescencion or diverting: please present your logic argument that, if there is One God, they would have a will/plan/goal for all of humanity, and a specific plan on top of that.[/QUOTE]

I have delivered the thinking behind the argument in my original post.. If that is insufficent for you then so be it.. What i have to give has already been given ..

 

[Freodin]

I have delivered the thinking behind the argument in my original post.. If that is insufficent for you then so be it.. What i have to give has already been given ..

You mean this post?

I'm sorry, but there is only the claim that such an argument exists.

"If we believe there is only One God, then logically it can be argued that that God would have a Will for all mankind."

You did not lay out this argument, or the "thinking behind it". Please do so.

 

[DogmaHunter]

The historical existence of Christ and the confirmation of His crucifixion by Roman historian Tacitus.

What use does that have?
How does that prove or support the idea that Jesus is god in human form?

After that, acceptance of the biblical manuscripts as historical sources on secular grounds.

How does one accept on "secular" grounds, that Moses splits a sea in half?
Or the obvious none-literal tales of genesis? Or the physically and biologically impossible literal tales of Noah and his ark and flood?

Finally, acceptance of the testimony of the disciples to the witness of Jesus' resurrection, and the willingness of most of them to be martyred for the truth.

What about all the testimonies of the followers of Mohammed? Or the tales from any other religion?

 

[DogmaHunter]

True, but something that is unique means it is worth having a closer look at it.
Christianity has many unique claims.

Every religion is unique. It's kind of what differentiates it from other religions.... :-/

 

[ToddNotTodd]

For you, it seems, it doesn't matter if there is an afterlife or not.
If that is so, then, for you, there's no need to think about this nor to worry about this.
Just remember you often were warned while you were alive, after you die is too late (and terrible consequences) to change the judgment you receive - it is final.

And I'm now warning you that the god Smoopydoop wants you to renounce your Christianity, lest you end up in the eternal BadPlace he will send you to after you die.

How much credence do you put on my warning?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That's funny, in an eternally sad way.....
sorry so many people in your life totally deceived you,
but realize that is commonplace on earth among humans - the whole system is deceptive,
and
few ever find and get on the narrow road to life. (you might have heard this before; well, this is why it is still true)

 

[HereIStand]

And I'm now warning you that the god Smoopydoop wants you to renounce your Christianity, lest you end up in the eternal BadPlace he will send you to after you die.

How much credence do you put on my warning?

Seem that some have reached such a level of enlightenment that even hell becomes a laughing matter.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

That's funny, in an eternally sad way.....
sorry so many people in your life totally deceived you,
but realize that is commonplace on earth among humans - the whole system is deceptive,
and
few ever find and get on the narrow road to life. (you might have heard this before; well, this is why it is still true)

You didn't actually answer the question. Do you have a reason why I should believe your warning and you shouldn't believe my warning?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Seem that some have reached such a level of enlightenment that even hell becomes a laughing matter.

You seem to have missed the point. I'm asking for a reason why I should believe in the Christian hell and not some other brand of bad afterlife.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

You didn't actually answer the question. Do you have a reason why I should believe your warning and you shouldn't believe my warning?

Well, since you are deceived, and apparently intent on deceiving others, there's no reason you would ever accept, so no, no reason you haven't already heard since childhood, and rejected however many times already...

 

[cloudyday2]

You seem to have missed the point. I'm asking for a reason why I should believe in the Christian hell and not some other brand of bad afterlife.

Here is a thought: As far as I know, Christianity is the only path that claims to be the only path. Furthermore, Christianity claims that people on other paths will suffer some horrible fate in hell. If a person was forced to choose between established religions, it would make sense to choose Christianity. If Christianity's claims are false, and some other religion's claims are true, then you are still o.k. - you just weren't on the ideal path.

Unfortunately, Christianity is also unique in the emphasis it places on belief. You might reason that Christianity is the best choice to minimize the risk of a wrong choice, but you might not be able to believe Christian claims. (Of course some versions of Christianity such as Orthodox do not care as much about belief - even though ironically Orthodox means "right belief" LOL.)