Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

1140141143145146327

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    marienbad wrote: »
    .

    If you find my contribution muddled, illogical, badly worded , fine - no problem , you are not obliged to answer .

    I will answer any question you like , but only when you stop including insult and invective in every post - until then- no .

    Insult & invective? Pot. Kettle. Black.

    How exactly is an interventionist God contradictory to the notion of free will? (Please note, saying "God is different" is not actually an answer to the question).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Penn wrote: »
    But why is there a Hell to begin with? Why is there a place for those who reject his offering of salvation to essentially burn forever in a lake of fire etc.? Why not just have it where if you reject his salvation etc, you just die. You die forever?

    Accept offer of salvation: Live forever in Heaven
    Reject offer of salvation: When you die, you die forever. You cease to be.

    Do you want to discuss why there is a hell? Or do you want to discuss a particular interpretation of what hell is like?

    I understand hell as being eternal separation from God's presence. If someone freely rejects the option to spend eternity with God, then they are choosing to spend eternity separated from God. So your question is really why are human souls eternal? Yes?


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,137 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    PDN wrote: »
    Penn wrote: »
    But why is there a Hell to begin with? Why is there a place for those who reject his offering of salvation to essentially burn forever in a lake of fire etc.? Why not just have it where if you reject his salvation etc, you just die. You die forever?

    Accept offer of salvation: Live forever in Heaven
    Reject offer of salvation: When you die, you die forever. You cease to be.

    Do you want to discuss why there is a hell? Or do you want to discuss a particular interpretation of what hell is like?

    I understand hell as being eternal separation from God's presence. If someone freely rejects the option to spend eternity with God, then they are choosing to spend eternity separated from God. So your question is really why are human souls eternal? Yes?

    Not really, though I suppose it is somewhat along the same lines.

    My point is, if someone held a gun to my head and said "Give me your wallet or I'll shoot you", I have free will. But there is a punishment which will be inflicted on me by the other person if I don't choose what they want me to choose. God gives us free will to accept his salvation, but there is a clear punishment there, which seeing as how he created everything including souls (as with the increasing population, he must be creating new souls all the time), he created the punishment. Why create a punishment?

    The concept of hell is a gun to your head. If the mugger said "Give me your wallet" and had no gun, I could use free will to choose whether or not to give him the wallet. If he has a gun to my head, it changes the choice. Do I give him my wallet, or do I let him shoot me in the head?

    Do I accept Gods salvation, or do I suffer and burn in eternal hell? It's not a fair choice. I have free will to choose, but the choices are uneven.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,205 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    Penn wrote: »
    PDN wrote: »
    Penn wrote: »
    But why is there a Hell to begin with? Why is there a place for those who reject his offering of salvation to essentially burn forever in a lake of fire etc.? Why not just have it where if you reject his salvation etc, you just die. You die forever?

    Accept offer of salvation: Live forever in Heaven
    Reject offer of salvation: When you die, you die forever. You cease to be.

    Do you want to discuss why there is a hell? Or do you want to discuss a particular interpretation of what hell is like?

    I understand hell as being eternal separation from God's presence. If someone freely rejects the option to spend eternity with God, then they are choosing to spend eternity separated from God. So your question is really why are human souls eternal? Yes?

    Not really, though I suppose it is somewhat along the same lines.

    My point is, if someone held a gun to my head and said "Give me your wallet or I'll shoot you", I have free will. But there is a punishment which will be inflicted on me by the other person if I don't choose what they want me to choose. God gives us free will to accept his salvation, but there is a clear punishment there, which seeing as how he created everything including souls (as with the increasing population, he must be creating new souls all the time), he created the punishment. Why create a punishment?

    The concept of hell is a gun to your head. If the mugger said "Give me your wallet" and had no gun, I could use free will to choose whether or not to give him the wallet. If he has a gun to my head, it changes the choice. Do I give him my wallet, or do I let him shoot me in the head?

    Do I accept Gods salvation, or do I suffer and burn in eternal hell? It's not a fair choice. I have free will to choose, but the choices are uneven.

    There are a number of denominations and individuals who over the centuries have considered eternal punishment to mean nonexistence, ie; the soul ceases to exist. While it's a minority view, it's a persistent one.

    An alternative analogy might involve a person who is hanging onto a cliff by their fingernails. Someone comes along and offers you a hand to clamber up - you have the choice of whether to accept that help others not, knowing that it was your own fault for falling off the edge. Obviously it might seem like it's unfair because you have no choice but then life is rarely fair! That would be something along the lines of the standard evangelical response - I say this as someone who has grave doubts about the notion of eternal torment. I find it hard to believe that God would ever give up waiting for someone to come home, but most Christians would probably disagree.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Penn: It would look like that from a perspective that we think that God's judgement is unfair or unjust. Actually, if we look at it honestly, we've all done wrong and we all deserve to be punished for it. We've all despised God in our daily lives, we've all shown that we have really hated Him. Yet, God still sent His Son, King Jesus into the world to rescue us while we still hated Him (Romans 5). Jesus presents the Parable of the Tenants which shows us God's faithfulness in bringing the truth to us.
    And he began to speak to them in parables. “A man planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a pit for the winepress and built a tower, and leased it to tenants and went into another country. When the season came, he sent a servant to the tenants to get from them some of the fruit of the vineyard. And they took him and beat him and sent him away empty-handed. Again he sent to them another servant, and they struck him on the head and treated him shamefully. And he sent another, and him they killed. And so with many others: some they beat, and some they killed. He had still one other, a beloved son. Finally he sent him to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But those tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.’ And they took him and killed him and threw him out of the vineyard. What will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the tenants and give the vineyard to others. Have you not read this Scripture:

    “‘The stone that the builders rejected
    has become the cornerstone;
    this was the Lord's doing,
    and it is marvelous in our eyes’?”
    And they were seeking to arrest him but feared the people, for they perceived that he had told the parable against them. So they left him and went away.

    And still, people spit in the face of that. People are without excuse as far as I can tell (Romans 1:20). God has shown time and time again how much He loves us, and most clearly showed this to us as he was hung on the cross on our behalf though He was blameless.

    I know that God's word is more true than the words of mere men, that's why I stand on them, and that's why I'm willing to take whatever the world throws at me and the Gospel. The Gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God (1 Corinthians 1:18).

    Pinning the blame on God is a result of not looking honestly at ourselves and how we've treated God. The simple question is this, are we going to come and live for King Jesus, or are we going to run from Him?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 33,137 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    philologos wrote: »
    Penn: It would look like that from a perspective that we think that God's judgement is unfair or unjust. Actually, if we look at it honestly, we've all done wrong and we all deserve to be punished for it. We've all despised God in our daily lives, we've all shown that we have really hated Him.

    And that sounds fair and just to you? If we've all "done wrong and deserve to be punished" just for not worshipping God enough, again, that's on God, not us. God is the one who decided that people should be punished for that. God is the one who decided that that is wrong.

    I ask again, why is there a punishment? Okay, if you worship God and accept his salvation, you are rewarded. But why did he create a punishment (Hell) for those who reject his salvation? Why not just have... no reward?

    Currently (as I see it, and bearing in mind that God is the one who decides what is right or wrong):
    Accept salvation - Eternal happiness in Heaven
    Reject salvation - Eternal suffering in Hell

    What an actual everloving God would do (again, as I see it):
    Accept salvation - Eternal happiness in Heaven
    Reject salvation - When you die, you die. Your soul dies, but there is no suffering. Your soul is not rewarded with eternal happiness, but you aren't eternally punished either


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Virgil°


    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    An alternative analogy might involve a person who is hanging onto a cliff by their fingernails. Someone comes along and offers you a hand to clamber up - you have the choice of whether to accept that help others not, knowing that it was your own fault for falling off the edge. Obviously it might seem like it's unfair because you have no choice but then life is rarely fair!

    Except for the analogy to work the person offering you a hand to clamber up is the one who threw you off the cliff in the first place. How is it my fault for falling off if I was designed like a lemming to fall off?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Virgil° wrote: »
    Except for the analogy to work the person offering you a hand to clamber up is the one who threw you off the cliff in the first place. How is it my fault for falling off if I was designed like a lemming to fall off?

    You weren't designed to fall. You were designed to live in righteousness. You chose otherwise.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Penn wrote: »
    And that sounds fair and just to you? If we've all "done wrong and deserve to be punished" just for not worshipping God enough
    I'm not sure where you're getting the material for your strawman here. We deserve to be punished for being selfish, for lying, for cheating and all the other sins we choose to commit - not for "not worshipping God enough".
    I ask again, why is there a punishment? Okay, if you worship God and accept his salvation, you are rewarded. But why did he create a punishment (Hell) for those who reject his salvation? Why not just have... no reward?
    First off, salvation is not a reward. It is an undeserved unmerited gift.

    Secondly, if rejecting salvation meany annihilation then you know fine well that you, or others of your faith, would be on here complaining about that too. "That's not fair! Just because I reject God why should my immortal soul be taken away from me? Wah!"

    You have an eternal soul. You get to choose whether that immortal soul spends eternity with God or without God. Sounds more than fair to me.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,137 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    PDN wrote: »
    I'm not sure where you're getting the material for your strawman here. We deserve to be punished for being selfish, for lying, for cheating and all the other sins we choose to commit - not for "not worshipping God enough".

    I was more so following the 'accepting God's salvation' line rather than 'not worshipping God enough', but fair enough, that comment was probably too flippant. However, three of the commandments are about worshipping God, so not worshipping God is a sin. Even if you committed no other sins throughout your whole life, those are still sins and could see you sent to Hell, no?

    As for "We deserve to be punished for being selfish, for lying, for cheating and all the other sins we choose to commit"... this is part of the reason I dislike religion. Why does religion make you feel so bad about yourself? You're the second person on this page to say that we deserve to be punished. Again, if we are born with sin, born to sin, or simply have the ability to sin at all, that's on God. He created us. He made us. He created the entire universe and every eternal soul... yet he can't fix that problem?

    Probably be accused of building another strawman here, but what the hey:
    You get married, your wife gives birth, the baby has some genetic defect. Do you blame the child? You created it. Your genetics led to that defect. You were the creator of that child. Does the child deserve to be punished for that? The child has free will, yet the genetic defect means it sometimes does things it shouldn't do. Does the child deserve to be punished? Does the child deserve to be made to feel bad about things it didn't choose to be born with? The child knows you love them, but that you also punish them for something they were made with.

    It's the exact same thing. God created us. We are God's children. We are born with sin. We are punished for sin. Sinning, is in our nature and as you said, we deserve to be punished for it. Yet, we got that sin from God. He created us with sin in our nature. And he punishes us for it. Everlasting... eternal... punishment... for something he gave us. We are made to feel bad (like I said, two of you have said "We deserve to be punished") for something God created us with.

    We deserve to be punished? No. God deserves to be punished.
    PDN wrote: »
    You have an eternal soul. You get to choose whether that immortal soul spends eternity with God or without God. Sounds more than fair to me.

    Again, Hell is a loaded gun to your head. Fair choice, live or die. I could easily choose either option. But the choices are not equally balanced. "Do as I say or suffer for eternity". That a fair choice?

    God is the one who chooses what is right or wrong. So he gives us free will to decide what to do, but if we don't do things as he said we do, we suffer for eternity in Hell. That's not a fair choice.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Penn wrote: »
    Again, Hell is a loaded gun to your head. Fair choice, live or die. I could easily choose either option. But the choices are not equally balanced. "Do as I say or suffer for eternity". That a fair choice?

    God is the one who chooses what is right or wrong. So he gives us free will to decide what to do, but if we don't do things as he said we do, we suffer for eternity in Hell. That's not a fair choice.

    I think you're confusing two separate issues here. Free will is one issue. Your subjective opinion about what is fair is another.

    The existence of free will is not contingent on all choices being equally balanced. That would only be possible in a morally neutral universe. In fact it is difficult to conceive of any kind of universe with meaning where all choices were equally balanced in terms of their consequences.

    You have the free will whether to commit suicide or not. Obviously the consequences of committing suicide are vastly different to those of not committing suicide - but that does not render your free will any less free, does it?

    In the same way you can choose whether to accept God's salvation or not. The fact that rejection of that salvation carries consequences in no way removes your free will. And, sadly, the proof is there for all to see in that people do, of their own free will, choose to reject salvation.
    As for "We deserve to be punished for being selfish, for lying, for cheating and all the other sins we choose to commit"... this is part of the reason I dislike religion. Why does religion make you feel so bad about yourself?
    Actually not all religion does so. At the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th Century there was a strong move towards a liberal form of 'Christianity' that taught that hhuman nature was basically good, that all we needed was better education and social conditions, and that if we all learned to practice Christian morals then heaven would arrive on earth and we'd all skip around playing with bunny rabbits and reciting uplifting poetry to each other.

    That kind of theology was pretty well skewered in the trenches of Flanders between 1914 and 1918 - and then was finished off for good in the ovens of Dachau.

    Acknowledging our sinfulness is simply being realistic about human nature. And even today, when I look at what is happening in the Congo, I think it is the appropriate response.


  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭nickcave


    PDN wrote: »
    We deserve to be punished for being selfish, for lying, for cheating and all the other sins we choose to commit - not for "not worshipping God enough".

    Well in the broader sense of 'worshipping God', we do. I assume we're not talking about 'hours spent in prayer' so much as 'following God's way' - and that that's what's meant by 'worshipping God enough' - it's about commitment to God.

    Moreover, my understanding is that we are not punished for being selfish, lying and cheating, but rather for being unrepentant in doing so, right? So it is about commitment to God.

    First off, salvation is not a reward. It is an undeserved unmerited gift.

    A gift in exchange for...? Some do not get this gift - there are criteria to fulfill. That's a reward, regardless or whatever desire to deprecate humanity you might have.

    I consider Kathy Bates' Oscar win for 'Misery' to be an 'undeserved, unmerited gift', does that make it not a reward?
    Secondly, if rejecting salvation meany annihilation then you know fine well that you, or others of your faith, would be on here complaining about that too. "That's not fair! Just because I reject God why should my immortal soul be taken away from me? Wah!"

    That's certainly true.
    You have an eternal soul. You get to choose whether that immortal soul spends eternity with God or without God. Sounds more than fair to me.

    This just restates the problem. I mean, yeah, that sounds great - that's a perfectly even choice. I'll choose without God. I'm kind of a freeloader, you know. Where do I go when I die?

    Eternal Damnation?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    nickcave wrote: »
    Well in the broader sense of 'worshipping God', we do. I assume we're not talking about 'hours spent in prayer' so much as 'following God's way' - and that that's what's meant by 'worshipping God enough' - it's about commitment to God.

    Moreover, my understanding is that we are not punished for being selfish, lying and cheating, but rather for being unrepentant in doing so, right? So it is about commitment to God.

    No, not right. Salvation is a free offer to escape the consequences of your selfishness, lying and cheating. But that does not mean you are punished for not accepting the offer.

    Think of it this way. If a murderer is serving a life sentence, and then turns down the offer of a presidential pardon - what is the crime for which they are still in prison? They are still being punished for murder - they didn't suddenly start serving a different sentence for the non-existent crime of rejecting a pardon.
    I consider Kathy Bates' Oscar win for 'Misery' to be an 'undeserved, unmerited gift', does that make it not a reward?
    I wouldn't dream on commenting on your lack of appreciation for Kathy Bates - nor indeed on your inability to distinguish between an award and a reward.
    This just restates the problem. I mean, yeah, that sounds great - that's a perfectly even choice. I'll choose without God. I'm kind of a freeloader, you know. Where do I go when I die?

    Eternal Damnation?

    You'll get what you chose - an eternity separated from God. I don't think God will need to damn you at all - I think you and your companions will be perfectly capable of managing that all by yourselves.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,137 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    PDN wrote: »
    I think you're confusing two separate issues here. Free will is one issue. Your subjective opinion about what is fair is another.

    I'm not confusing the two, I'm saying if I have free will, it is only natural that some people would disagree with what God says is right or wrong. God says not worshipping him is a sin (again, first three commandments). I have free will, so I don't see that as being a sin. I could live the most selfless, charitable life in every way possible, but not worship God. But because God decided that not worshipping him was a sin... Helltown for me. And yet, the only reason I could choose not to worship him, is because of the free will he gave me.
    PDN wrote: »
    The existence of free will is not contingent on all choices being equally balanced. That would only be possible in a morally neutral universe. In fact it is difficult to conceive of any kind of universe with meaning where all choices were equally balanced in terms of their consequences.

    You have the free will whether to commit suicide or not. Obviously the consequences of committing suicide are vastly different to those of not committing suicide - but that does not render your free will any less free, does it?

    In the same way you can choose whether to accept God's salvation or not. The fact that rejection of that salvation carries consequences in no way removes your free will. And, sadly, the proof is there for all to see in that people do, of their own free will, choose to reject salvation.

    Okay, suicide. Person can no longer handle their life. They just can't handle it any more, and see suicide as the only way to end their suffering. They've lived life as best, as kindly, as charitable, as selfless as they could, but for whatever reason, they just can't handle it any more and see suicide as their only option. So they kill themselves to end their suffering.

    But, suicide is a sin, so they burn in Hell for eternity, with endless suffering.

    Again... deserve to be punished? Everloving God?

    PDN wrote: »
    Actually not all religion does so. At the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th Century there was a strong move towards a liberal form of 'Christianity' that taught that hhuman nature was basically good, that all we needed was better education and social conditions, and that if we all learned to practice Christian morals then heaven would arrive on earth and we'd all skip around playing with bunny rabbits and reciting uplifting poetry to each other.

    That kind of theology was pretty well skewered in the trenches of Flanders between 1914 and 1918 - and then was finished off for good in the ovens of Dachau.

    Acknowledging our sinfulness is simply being realistic about human nature. And even today, when I look at what is happening in the Congo, I think it is the appropriate response.

    And again, sinfulness.. that we were born with. Why do we deserve to be punished? Why not some of us deserve to be punished? Why have sin at all? Why include that as standard? If I was building a toaster, I wouldn't build it so it's programmed to burn the bread and to try and recognise and stop before it gets burnt. And if it did burn the bread, I wouldn't smack it with a hammer. It's not the toaster's fault. I created it, I built in that ability.

    I'd build it not to burn the bread.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Penn wrote: »
    I'm not confusing the two, I'm saying if I have free will, it is only natural that some people would disagree with what God says is right or wrong. God says not worshipping him is a sin (again, first three commandments). I have free will, so I don't see that as being a sin. I could live the most selfless, charitable life in every way possible, but not worship God. But because God decided that not worshipping him was a sin... Helltown for me. And yet, the only reason I could choose not to worship him, is because of the free will he gave me..

    So now you're complaining because your free will has consequences? If it was devoid of consequences then it wouldn't really be free will at all, would it?

    The beautiful thing about the Gospel is that it deals with reality, not pie in the sky hypotheticals. You haven't lived the most selfless charitable life in every way possible. Neither have I. So the Gospel addresses us where we are at.
    Okay, suicide. Person can no longer handle their life. They just can't handle it any more, and see suicide as the only way to end their suffering. They've lived life as best, as kindly, as charitable, as selfless as they could, but for whatever reason, they just can't handle it any more and see suicide as their only option. So they kill themselves to end their suffering.

    But, suicide is a sin, so they burn in Hell for eternity, with endless suffering.

    Again... deserve to be punished? Everloving God?

    You do seem to keep changing the subject. And they increasingly look quite like red herrings.

    I don't think suicide is necessarily a sin. Nor do I believe that suicide condemns you to hell.

    Any more questions about free will?
    And again, sinfulness.. that we were born with. Why do we deserve to be punished? Why not some of us deserve to be punished? Why have sin at all? Why include that as standard? If I was building a toaster, I wouldn't build it so it's programmed to burn the bread and to try and recognise and stop before it gets burnt. And if it did burn the bread, I wouldn't smack it with a hammer. It's not the toaster's fault. I created it, I built in that ability.

    I'd build it not to burn the bread.

    So, if you were God you would have created us without any meaningful kind of free will. That would make us like pre-programmed androids. A bit like choosing to play the Sims rather than get married and have real flesh and blood kids. I'm grateful that you're not God (and I'm grateful that I'm not either).


  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭nickcave


    PDN wrote: »
    No, not right. Salvation is a free offer to escape the consequences of your selfishness, lying and cheating. But that does not mean you are punished for not accepting the offer.
    And how do I sign up to this? I do it by accepting God and following His way, i.e. committing to God. That was my point. You're comparing humanity to a murderer facing execution - and that, without God's action, it's our own sin which will land us in the chair. So God is passive in all this? Then who put us on death row - who initiated all this?
    I wouldn't dream on commenting on your lack of appreciation for Kathy Bates - nor indeed on your inability to distinguish between an award and a reward.
    You're clouding the argument here. 'Award' and 'reward' are synonyms with some contextual differences, sometimes. Pick one or the other and lets deal with the argument?
    I don't think God will need to damn you at all - I think you and your companions will be perfectly capable of managing that all by yourselves.
    And what exactly does that mean? Does it have any argumentative value here, or are you just being snide? I'm not up for the usual slogfest, to be honest with you. And I don't have 'companions' in any case.

    edit: I actually do have companions, of course.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    ''So now you're complaining because your free will has consequences? If it was devoid of consequences then it wouldn't really be free will at all, would it?''

    Exactly what I have said for the last 10 pages or so !!


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,137 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    PDN wrote: »
    So now you're complaining because your free will has consequences? If it was devoid of consequences then it wouldn't really be free will at all, would it?

    The beautiful thing about the Gospel is that it deals with reality, not pie in the sky hypotheticals. You haven't lived the most selfless charitable life in every way possible. Neither have I. So the Gospel addresses us where we are at.

    And again, loaded gun to your head. I have the free will to choose not to give the mugger my wallet. But there's a clear consequence there. So is it really free will? "Do what I tell you to do, or you die". Technically, yes, it's my decision. But it's not a fair choice.
    PDN wrote: »
    You do seem to keep changing the subject. And they increasingly look quite like red herrings.

    I don't think suicide is necessarily a sin. Nor do I believe that suicide condemns you to hell.

    Any more questions about free will?

    You brought up suicide, I was merely giving my take on your point.

    As for you not thinking suicide is a sin, that's not what the Church says. So do you think your subjective opinion is more valid than the Church's (and by extension, God's)? Yes, some say that suicide may not actually condemn people to Hell, but it is a sin. Now when you get further into it, if there is some ambiguity in what is a sin, what isn't a sin, will that sin send me to Hell, if I don't consider it to be a sin is it still a sin... Nobody will ever get to Heaven because no-one knows what's going on. If all we can do is use our own best judgements as best we can, we might still be wrong and be condemned to Hell. It's a game we're playing that we don't know the rules to. The game is rigged.
    PDN wrote: »
    So, if you were God you would have created us without any meaningful kind of free will. That would make us like pre-programmed androids. A bit like choosing to play the Sims rather than get married and have real flesh and blood kids. I'm grateful that you're not God (and I'm grateful that I'm not either).

    No, I'm saying that if I was God, there wouldn't be Heaven or Hell. No reward and no punishment. There would be no such thing as a sin, only a choice. True free will. Because eventually, you'd get what we have now. Societies would form. Rules that they decide would be established. Rules which are fair for everyone. Rewards for doing good things. Punishments for doing bad things. I wouldn't decree that people should live their lives a certain way, I'd decree that people should live. No worshipping me (again, first three commandments), no doing what they think I want them to do... just living.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Penn wrote: »
    And again, loaded gun to your head. I have the free will to choose not to give the mugger my wallet. But there's a clear consequence there. So is it really free will? "Do what I tell you to do, or you die". Technically, yes, it's my decision. But it's not a fair choice.

    Again, nothing in life is equal in all respects. Everything is, in someone's eyes, unfair.

    In fact the Gospel is most certainly unfair. I deserve to go to hell - yet instead I get an undeserved free pardon. That is most emphatically, and yet gloriously, unfair.
    You brought up suicide, I was merely giving my take on your point.
    No, you weren't. You were banging on about sin and hell which, if I understand your beliefs at all, is not your take on it.
    As for you not thinking suicide is a sin, that's not what the Church says.
    You are aware that there is more than one denomination in the Church?
    So do you think your subjective opinion is more valid than the Church's (and by extension, God's)?
    By now you're missing the point by a country mile. I don't accept that one denomination's viewpoint is 'by extension' God's opinion. Quite the reverse in fact.

    I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it says that commiting suicide will send you to hell.
    Now when you get further into it, if there is some ambiguity in what is a sin, what isn't a sin, will that sin send me to Hell, if I don't consider it to be a sin is it still a sin... Nobody will ever get to Heaven because no-one knows what's going on. If all we can do is use our own best judgements as best we can, we might still be wrong and be condemned to Hell. It's a game we're playing that we don't know the rules to. The game is rigged.
    Classic evasion. That's a bit like speeding through the centre of Dublin at 100 mph and then trying to excuse yourself by arguing that there's a lane in Leitrim where there's some uncertainty as to the speed limit.

    You and I both know that cheating, lying and living selfishly is wrong - and no amount of barrack-room lawyering can evade that.
    No, I'm saying that if I was God, there wouldn't be Heaven or Hell. No reward and no punishment. There would be no such thing as a sin, only a choice. True free will. Because eventually, you'd get what we have now. Societies would form. Rules that they decide would be established. Rules which are fair for everyone. Rewards for doing good things. Punishments for doing bad things. I wouldn't decree that people should live their lives a certain way, I'd decree that people should live. No worshipping me (again, first three commandments), no doing what they think I want them to do... just living.

    Now, here's the wee fly in the ointment of your scheme. If you give these people real free will, then how on earth can you ensure that the rules they make (without interference from you) will be fair for everybody?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    marienbad wrote: »
    ''So now you're complaining because your free will has consequences? If it was devoid of consequences then it wouldn't really be free will at all, would it?''

    Exactly what I have said for the last 10 pages or so !!

    Ah, you're back.

    So, once again, how exactly is an interventionist God contradictory to the notion of free will? (Please note, saying "God is different" is not actually an answer to the question).


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    nickcave wrote: »
    And how do I sign up to this? I do it by accepting God and following His way, i.e. committing to God. That was my point. You're comparing humanity to a murderer facing execution - and that, without God's action, it's our own sin which will land us in the chair. So God is passive in all this? Then who put us on death row - who initiated all this?
    You initiated it by sinning.
    You're clouding the argument here. 'Award' and 'reward' are synonyms with some contextual differences, sometimes. Pick one or the other and lets deal with the argument?
    I wan't aware that there was an argument to deal with - just an irrelevant comment about the Oscars.
    And what exactly does that mean? Does it have any argumentative value here, or are you just being snide? I'm not up for the usual slogfest, to be honest with you. And I don't have 'companions' in any case.

    edit: I actually do have companions, of course.

    It would be easier if we could have a discussion without you getting all precious when you don't like my direct answer to a direct question.

    If you choose to spend eternity away from God's presence then you're going to spend that eternity somewhere. Others who make a similar choice will presumably be in the same place. A quick glance at history suggests that between you all you will manage to screw that up royally. Hell could be a beautiful garden with every possible beneficial amenity - but I see nothing to suggest that human nature will change. It won't be long before that beautiful garden becomes a polluted cesspit where monsters like Hitler, Mao, Genghis Khan and Torquemada will have an eternity to work out ways to exploit the gullible masses and to torture people. And even death will no longer exist as a release.

    In fact, such a place would be exactly like the world that Penn would have created if he were God. Nobody to tell you what is right or wrong. Make whatever rules you all want by your free will - and then punish those who don't conform. Sometimes, just possibly, you do get what you ask for.


  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭nickcave


    PDN wrote: »
    You initiated it by sinning.
    But I was born in sin, right? I was created as a sinner. What choice did I have? You're holding two contradictory positions - it's untenable. You're holding that we were created by God and that we are born in sin. You're also holding that we are on a course towards hell that is of our own design, and that God is active only in removing us from that course - if we choose to accept him. That is untenable - it cannot work both ways.
    I wan't aware that there was an argument to deal with - just an irrelevant comment about the Oscars.
    I don't have to tell you that you're wrong here, but anyway: A central point of the current argument you're involved in is that God rewards those who follow His way (and punished those who don't, but let's leave that aside for a minute). You rebutted that it is not a reward, but an undeserved gift. I pointed out by analogy that your opinion on whether or not salvation was deserved was does not affect the principle - it is still a reward. Yet you consider that my analogy was 'irrelevant', for reasons I can only imagine. You also claim to be unaware of the argument - fair enough.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,137 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    PDN wrote: »
    Now, here's the wee fly in the ointment of your scheme. If you give these people real free will, then how on earth can you ensure that the rules they make (without interference from you) will be fair for everybody?

    If I do interfere, then it isn't free will.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    nickcave wrote: »
    But I was born in sin, right?

    Wrong, you weren't born in sin. You were born with a bias or tendency towards sin. But each individual sin you have committed you did them of your own volition, and in each case you had the power and the opportunity to refrain from committing that sin.
    You're holding two contradictory positions - it's untenable. You're holding that we were created by God and that we are born in sin.
    Really? Where did I say that we are born in sin?
    I don't have to tell you that you're wrong here, but anyway: A central point of the current argument you're involved in is that God rewards those who follow His way
    Wrong again. Where did I say that God rewards us? I believe that salvation is an undeserved gift.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Penn wrote: »
    If I do interfere, then it isn't free will.

    So all of this: "Societies would form. Rules that they decide would be established. Rules which are fair for everyone. Rewards for doing good things. Punishments for doing bad things." That is just a pious hope, isn't it? Isn't it just as likely that societies will form who torture each other at will, reward those who are the best torturers, and punish the namby-pambies who refuse to torture anyone?


  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭nickcave


    PDN wrote: »
    Where did I say that we are born in sin?
    I was under the impression that you were a Christian.
    Where did I say that God rewards us?
    Penn did, and I agreed. You said the opposite, obviously. Your avoidances aren't very deft you know...


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,137 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    PDN wrote: »
    So all of this: "Societies would form. Rules that they decide would be established. Rules which are fair for everyone. Rewards for doing good things. Punishments for doing bad things." That is just a pious hope, isn't it? Isn't it just as likely that societies will form who torture each other at will, reward those who are the best torturers, and punish the namby-pambies who refuse to torture anyone?

    I wouldn't say it's just as likely, but it is a possibility. The reason I'd bet towards it ending up like I said is because basic instinct is to do whatever is necessary for the species to survive. That means working together. Helping each other. There will always be members of the societies who are selfish, greedy, murderous etc etc. Yet, what they do isn't of benefit to everyone, so it would be less likely to be rewarded.

    Take tribes. Rarely, if ever, is there fighting within the tribe. They don't worship "God", yet they find a way to peacefully co-exist, to help each other, to establish some forms of law within the tribes.

    It would most likely end up like I said, because that's the way pretty much every form of society has ended up, regardless of religion. Sure, all societies may not be fair for everyone, but they are generally all improving and aiming towards that.

    So, if God interferes, then is it truly free will?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    nickcave wrote: »
    I was under the impression that you were a Christian.
    Indeed I am a Christian. Maybe you should do a bit more investigation as to what different Christians believe rather than operate on false assumptions?

    After all, we're always happy to answer questions about our faith.
    Penn did, and I agreed. You said the opposite, obviously. Your avoidances aren't very deft you know...
    It's not an 'avoidance' when I point out that my beliefs are different to what you assume.

    I do not believe that salvation is a reward for any good work or action.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Penn wrote: »
    I wouldn't say it's just as likely, but it is a possibility. The reason I'd bet towards it ending up like I said is because basic instinct is to do whatever is necessary for the species to survive. That means working together. Helping each other. There will always be members of the societies who are selfish, greedy, murderous etc etc. Yet, what they do isn't of benefit to everyone, so it would be less likely to be rewarded.
    History suggests otherwise.
    Take tribes. Rarely, if ever, is there fighting within the tribe. They don't worship "God", yet they find a way to peacefully co-exist, to help each other, to establish some forms of law within the tribes.
    That isn't actually true. Fighting occurs in tribes pretty frequently. They do, of course, tend to have more inner cohesion when they are busy slaughtering outsiders.
    It would most likely end up like I said, because that's the way pretty much every form of society has ended up, regardless of religion. Sure, all societies may not be fair for everyone, but they are generally all improving and aiming towards that.
    Again, history suggests otherwise. In fact there have only been a tiny minority of times and places in history where we could have a public discussion like this without at least one of us ending up being burned at the stake or sent to a gulag.
    So, if God interferes, then is it truly free will?
    I have repeatedly asked (in bold face and red ink, no less) for someone to demonstrate why it isn't. So far the silence is deafening.

    God tells people what is right and what is wrong, and sends prophets and messengers to enncourage people to choose the right, and warns us of the consequences of our choices. Not only that, He comes to earth in the Person of Jesus and suffers horrendously to give us an opportunity to choose a better path. All of this is intervention - but it is clearly compatible with allowing free will, as evidenced by the many people who still spurn Him.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭nickcave


    PDN wrote: »
    Indeed I am a Christian. Maybe you should do a bit more investigation as to what different Christians believe rather than operate on false assumptions?

    After all, we're always happy to answer questions about our faith.
    Very well then: what is your position on original sin, and the condition of man? Of what denomination are you or which are you closest to?
    It's not an 'avoidance' when I point out that my beliefs are different to what you assume.
    Quantify this - tell me what I assumed regarding your position on the reward/gift question, where I assumed it and how it differs from your actual position.
    I do not believe that salvation is a reward for any good work or action.
    Yes, again thanks for that. Now we're back to my 'irrelevant' analogy - why does your opinion on whether or not salvation is deserved affect it being or not being a reward? But to move on, is accepting God's way not a 'good action', then? What does God offer salvation in response to?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement