Rejecting God

a particularly religious friend of mine (Jon), recommended that i read a book called "The Case For Christ", because i had expressed my doubts on the evidence for certain events such as Jesus's ressuection. anyway i read it and was left feeling like i had gotten a biased opinion, or at least a biased analyzation of the evidence. my friend said that i seem to be so stuck in my own way of thinking (basically atheist) that there could be no evidence to change my mind, short of death and meeting Him myself.

Jon then said that at least when i die (although too late i think he was insinuating) i'd finally accept god because i'd have the ultimate proof.

i then told him that if i meet this God when i die and He is exactly like the christian faith depicts him and has the same views on what's right and wrong, i would choose to reject this God because of the way He felt on certain subjects (this was spawned out of a gay rights argument), such as gay rights.

this is a very strange thing to reject God and, well sentence urself to an eternity of hell based on principal alone

i have been reading the posts in this forum for a few nights now and noticed how many "generally non-believers" there were, so i was wonderring how many of you, if faced with meeting God and Him turning out to actually be the one of the christian faith, how many of you would be actually choose to give the perverbial "up yours" to your creator?

i do realize that this is somewhat strange to tell your creator "what's what", but i really can't see wavering on my opinions, even for the great one

Opinions?

by the way i'm not sure why i capitalize the g in God or H in him, so don't ask me

[chezlaw]

I would reject a god who condemns those who don't believe. This sounds right but cant be true for me because I don't believe and hence either I will not be given the chance to reject god, or god doesn't reject those who don't believe (does that make sense /images/graemlins/smile.gif)

Similarly with most other views/behaviors so the fact you are being given the chance to accept god, now that you are dead, means its not the god of christian faith.

chez

by "accepting God" my friend only meant in my own mind realizing that He is real .... Jon also pointed that out to me after i said it /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

thank you chez for being the first reply on my first post

[Jeff V]

If you found that it was the God of the Bible how could you fault Him for his stance on certain issues? He created everything, therefore He has the right if not the duty to determine right and wrong (for his creations). It would not be a feeling, but His law.

What if you created a computer, and it always said 3+3=8? You as the creator know this is wrong but the computer decides that it likes 8 better, and decides to reject you?
That is it's own choice which it will have to live with, but you know since you created it that it's not right.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
If you found that it was the God of the Bible how could you fault Him for his stance on certain issues? He created everything, therefore He has the right if not the duty to determine right and wrong (for his creations). It would not be a feeling, but His law.

What if you created a computer, and it always said 3+3=8? You as the creator know this is wrong but the computer decides that it likes 8 better, and decides to reject you?
That is it's own choice which it will have to live with, but you know since you created it that it's not right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why should being the creator mean he has any rights? Just sounds like your opinion.

I would find fault with god if he punishes those who don't believe in him. It would be illogical of me to do otherwise.

and if I created a computer that said 3+3=8 then I would be at fault.
chez

[ QUOTE ]
If you found that it was the God of the Bible how could you fault Him for his stance on certain issues? He created everything, therefore He has the right if not the duty to determine right and wrong (for his creations). It would not be a feeling, but His law.

What if you created a computer, and it always said 3+3=8? You as the creator know this is wrong but the computer decides that it likes 8 better, and decides to reject you?
That is it's own choice which it will have to live with, but you know since you created it that it's not right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah but if the computer says 3+3=8, then the programmer made an error.

Same thing goes for the programmer of god's creations.

[ QUOTE ]
If you found that it was the God of the Bible how could you fault Him for his stance on certain issues? He created everything, therefore He has the right if not the duty to determine right and wrong (for his creations). It would not be a feeling, but His law.

What if you created a computer, and it always said 3+3=8? You as the creator know this is wrong but the computer decides that it likes 8 better, and decides to reject you?
That is it's own choice which it will have to live with, but you know since you created it that it's not right.

[/ QUOTE ]

opinions on many subjects are not set in stone as with 3+3=6 not 8. say that the programmer programmed that 3+3=8 and the computer(capable of learning from other computers and has it's own intelligence and free will), realizes that to it, 3+3=6 seems better, the computer could potentially be right.

now this assumes that God is capable of having faults.

assuming that god is faultless, someone programms that 3+3=6, can a computer be faulted for coming up with a defferent answer if the programmer has given it free will.

the question of my post(relating to this analogy) is that should the computer, if told again by thee programmer what is tru and dwhat is not, trust the programmer blindly when everything that it knows tells it a different answer.

this is expanded when the issue is one that relates to one's fellow man and is the difference between an eterenity in heaven or hell. could you stand by and be part of heaven knowing that a good friend of yours who is one of the most genuinely good people you've ever met, but doesn't believe the christian faith go to hell, or would you refuse to a part of god's little club?

[ QUOTE ]

the question of my post(relating to this analogy) is that should the computer, if told again by thee programmer what is tru and dwhat is not, trust the programmer blindly when everything that it knows tells it a different answer.


[/ QUOTE ]

Should people have believed Einstein even though everything they knew (Newtons physics) disagreed?

Youre just being incredibly stubborn. You said that if you met the Christian God (by definition the absolute authority on everything) that you would reject what you know to be the truth. Just silly. Would you ever consider this in any other area of your life.

I imagine that even the bashiest of the gay bashers would change their opinion if told by God that they were wrong. Who would you ever listen to if not an omnipotent all knowing God?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Who would you ever listen to if not an omnipotent all knowing God?

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't follow that because god knows the truth that he isn't being deceitful.

Any god that created me and condemns those who don't believe is either not good or deceitful.

Either way, rejecting the kingdom of god should be seriously considered.

chez

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

the question of my post(relating to this analogy) is that should the computer, if told again by thee programmer what is tru and dwhat is not, trust the programmer blindly when everything that it knows tells it a different answer.


[/ QUOTE ]

Should people have believed Einstein even though everything they knew (Newtons physics) disagreed?

Youre just being incredibly stubborn. You said that if you met the Christian God (by definition the absolute authority on everything) that you would reject what you know to be the truth. Just silly. Would you ever consider this in any other area of your life.

I imagine that even the bashiest of the gay bashers would change their opinion if told by God that they were wrong. Who would you ever listen to if not an omnipotent all knowing God?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would most deffinitely admit that i am extremely stubborn

i suppose that if God gave me information, previousely unknown to myself explaining how being gay or having premarrital sex or not believing him is as eggregious a sin as harming another person(i believe all sins are equal in the christian faith, correct me if i'm wrong), then i suppose i may be able to see his way, but i highly doubt that that information is there, and therefor i would choose to not be part of his crew(although i wouldn't be allowed in even if i wanted to)

i wouldn't want to associate myself with any god that would do this to people, and that's my own free will... i personally believe that i would care more about people in this situation and this makes me better than that God. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

---yes i said it

[Alex/Mugaaz]

I hate this post. This is a clear example when both sides don't know what they're arguing, why they're arguing, and why they're both wrong.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate this post. This is a clear example when both sides don't know what they're arguing, why they're arguing, and why they're both wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Three sides now, welcome. What are you arguing, why, and do you know your right?

chez

[ QUOTE ]

It doesn't follow that because god knows the truth that he isn't being deceitful.

Any god that created me and condemns those who don't believe is either not good or deceitful.

Either way, rejecting the kingdom of god should be seriously considered.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

This is sillier than anything a religious person could say. At least there is some chance that religious people are right. They just greatly overstate their case. You on the other hand, would meet God (thus knowing the truth with 100% certainty )and then reject it.

Whats wrong with believing that there is 75-95% that God does not exist, but still keep an open mind and evaluate the evidence as it comes in? You can still be 99.99999% certain that any specific religion is wrong.

As to God decieving you, well being all good I dont know that he could do this, but this is merely one of those silly paradoxes that point with near certainty to specific religions being constructed by men.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

i do realize that this is somewhat strange to tell your creator "what's what",


[/ QUOTE ]

It's very rare to find someone as straightforward as this. The fundamental sin of mankind according to the Bible is the desire to set up independently of God and then judge Him based on their own standards. Basically everyone who doesn't accept Him is saying "Up yours".

Though the absurdity of this is apparent, all unbelievers are essentially doing this but few admit it.

There are several places in the Bible where this attitude is addressed. The entire book of Job for instance is about how neither Job nor his friends have the right to judge God, and in the end, Job realizes this and admits it. In Romans, Paul says "Who are you, O man, who answers back to God?"

As for punishing you for your unbelief, that leaves out most of the story. All are sinners and reject God's authority. To remedy this, God sent His Son to be a sacrifice for our sins. When you reject the free offer of justification, forgiveness of sins, there remains no more sacrifice. In spite of this, and even though you think you have a case, in the end "Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord".

[ QUOTE ]

Though the absurdity of this is apparent, all unbelievers are essentially doing this but few admit it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thats nonsense. Not you calling the OP absurd, the fact that you think all nonbelievers do this.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

. Not you calling the OP absurd, the fact that you think all nonbelievers do this.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just read a few posts in this forum from unbelievers. The constant, unremitting refrain is that "What I believe is all that counts, no one can tell me what's right and wrong". Even if a few defer to someone else, like a moral philosopher for instance, they still reserve the right to decide if that person is right. Just so long as the moral law isn't absolute and doesn't come from an Absolute Personality.

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

. Not you calling the OP absurd, the fact that you think all nonbelievers do this.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just read a few posts in this forum from unbelievers. The constant, unremitting refrain is that "What I believe is all that counts, no one can tell me what's right and wrong". Even if a few defer to someone else, like a moral philosopher for instance, they still reserve the right to decide if that person is right. Just so long as the moral law isn't absolute and doesn't come from an Absolute Personality.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't speak for the other unbelievers, but atheism does not necessarily imply lack of acceptance of an objective moral code. I claim raping children is absolutely wrong, regardless of what a "god" proclaims.

It seems there is equivocation in this thread between rejecting the existence of "god" and condemning him morally. If I ever met this "god," I would accept him in the former sense, but emphatically reject him in the latter sense, for a variety of reasons.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
This is sillier than anything a religious person could say. At least there is some chance that religious people are right. They just greatly overstate their case. You on the other hand, would meet God (thus knowing the truth with 100% certainty )and then reject it.

Whats wrong with believing that there is 75-95% that God does not exist, but still keep an open mind and evaluate the evidence as it comes in? You can still be 99.99999% certain that any specific religion is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not silly to reject a god who condemns those who don't believe. The conclusion that I would reject god sounds silly (probably is silly) but thats not because my logic is wrong its because the premises is silly i.e. a good god who rejects those who don't believe.

If you think the sillyness lies in the logic rather than the premise then tell me why.

[ QUOTE ]
As to God decieving you, well being all good I dont know that he could do this, but this is merely one of those silly paradoxes that point with near certainty to specific religions being constructed by men.

[/ QUOTE ]

After telling me I'm being silly you then say this, which is the point I am making if you think about it.

chez

The Old Testament makes it impossible for me to follow the Christian God. It describes a God who commits genocide, orders slavery, visits plagues on whole cities, horribly tortures his faithful believers for purposes as minor as winning a wager, kills children for as little as making fun of a bald guy, scourges anyone who doesn't agree with him, and is generally an all-around [censored].

If the God of Isaac, Abraham, and Jacob did in fact exist, I'd think it was our duty to oppose him.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Just read a few posts in this forum from unbelievers. The constant, unremitting refrain is that "What I believe is all that counts, no one can tell me what's right and wrong".

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not as simple as that. What you have said is true if god doesn't exist but once you consider that god does exists then it changes. Suddenly my sense of right and wrong comes from god and it must count unless god is deceitful.

My sense of right and wrong screams in outrage at any power that condemns those who don't believe - I can't think of anything closer to pure evil.

So I don't believe that a good god can condemn those who don't believe.

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

So I don't believe that a good god can condemn those who don't believe.


[/ QUOTE ]

Repeating:

As for punishing you for your unbelief, that leaves out most of the story. All are sinners and reject God's authority. To remedy this, God sent His Son to be a sacrifice for our sins. When you reject the free offer of justification, forgiveness of sins, there remains no more sacrifice. In spite of this, and even though you think you have a case, in the end "Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord".

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So I don't believe that a good god can condemn those who don't believe.


[/ QUOTE ]

Repeating:

As for punishing you for your unbelief, that leaves out most of the story. All are sinners and reject God's authority. To remedy this, God sent His Son to be a sacrifice for our sins. When you reject the free offer of justification, forgiveness of sins, there remains no more sacrifice. In spite of this, and even though you think you have a case, in the end "Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord".

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe but many don't belief and even if its a mistake its an honest one.

The punishment is just too extreme (by an infinte order of magnitude) for an honest lack of belief/understanding.

I still cannot come close to reconciling it with my moral feelings which if given by a good god are not deceptive.

What about you, forget the bible for a minute. Can an infinite punishment for an honest mistake be just according to your moral feelings?

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Can an infinite punishment for an honest mistake be just according to your moral feelings?


[/ QUOTE ]

The point I was trying to make is that since there is no sacrifice for sin if you reject the forgiveness which God provides you are still in your sin and are therefore punished for that, not just your unbelief. I also think it's wrong to call unbelief an honest mistake. The Bible is clear about everyone being without excuse. People fool themselves all the time thinking God will overlook this or forgive that but God takes sin seriously. It's bad enough that the only way He could help us without compromising His character was to send His Son to die for us. To then refuse to accept that work which He did that we might be saved leaves the unbeliever without remedy.

[NotReady]

Ezekiel 18:32
"For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live."

Ezekiel 33:11
"Say to them, ' As I live!' declares the Lord GOD, 'I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?'

2 Peter 3:9
9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Can an infinite punishment for an honest mistake be just according to your moral feelings?


[/ QUOTE ]

The point I was trying to make is that since there is no sacrifice for sin if you reject the forgiveness which God provides you are still in your sin and are therefore punished for that, not just your unbelief. I also think it's wrong to call unbelief an honest mistake. The Bible is clear about everyone being without excuse. People fool themselves all the time thinking God will overlook this or forgive that but God takes sin seriously. It's bad enough that the only way He could help us without compromising His character was to send His Son to die for us. To then refuse to accept that work which He did that we might be saved leaves the unbeliever without remedy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe the bible is made up by man and none of that stuff happened. If I'm wrong then I'm wrong but I'm not lying or being tricky about it - its an honest mistake.

I don't claim to be perfect (not even close). I do lots of things that are wrong and could justifiably be punished, but my wrongs are not so bad that an infinite punishment is justifiable (again according to this god given sense of justice).

Again forget the bible for a moment. Does you're moral sense think the sins of the average person justify an infinite punishment?

chez

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
if faced with meeting God and Him turning out to actually be the one of the christian faith, how many of you would be actually choose to give the perverbial "up yours" to your creator?


[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't this what Lucifer did?

Stu

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Again forget the bible for a moment. Does you're moral sense think the sins of the average person justify an infinite punishment?


[/ QUOTE ]

No Christian I've ever read or talked to likes the idea of punishment. So I don't fully understand the severity. However, I can't forget the Bible. If it's true, then not only is the punishment true but it is also true that God is greater than my understanding, that God is just, that He so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that forgiveness of sins and life everlasting is available to all who believe. I believe no one is punished who doesn't deserve it and no one is forgiven who does deserve it.

One thing we learn from the fact of punishment for what we consider minor infractions is that God doesn't consider them minor. In the end, God will win this debate and all will agree with His justice.

The true picture isn't of a vindictive God waiting and hoping for someone to tell a lie or commit a "minor" sin so He can torture him forever. All sin is just the tip of the iceberg - the evil of the human heart is far deeper than people understand. God says that those who appear good to us but reject Him are evil. The harshest words spoken by Jesus were directed to the most religious people of the day. He associated with prostitutes, thieves and tax-gatherers(who were thieves under the Roman system), and He brought very harsh accusations against the scribes and Pharisees. The Bible says that Jesus knew what was in the heart of men and that man judges by appearances but God by the heart.

[Jeff V]

"I believe the bible is made up by man and none of that stuff happened. If I'm wrong then I'm wrong but I'm not lying or being tricky about it - its an honest mistake."

Do you know why you believe this? Would you be willing to have an open mind, research, ask questions,and research some more? I know not believing is easier, I was an atheist for 10+ years. In my case it was much easier to dismiss everything as "made up", or fairy tales. However now I feel that there is enough evidence out there that points to a loving God. I also believe if people truly seek Him with an open mind, and with all their heart, they will find Him.

[chezlaw]

its not just not liking punishment or misunderstanding something. Moral feelings are directly experienced and morally I believe that condemning people for not believing is extremely unjust.

I'm not sure if you have the same moral feeling but can you at least understand that for someone who does they cannot believe in a non-deceiving good god that condemns those who don't believe?

I get the impression that you don't share my moral feeling because you believe the bible is true. That may be right I don't know, but for those like me who don't believe the bible it can't change anything.

Hopefully, although we wont change each others views, you can understand why I and others reject the idea of such a god, and really don't have a choice about it.

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

condemning people for not believing is extremely unjust.


[/ QUOTE ]

You keep saying this. But I keep pointing out that God is not punishing anyone because they don't believe a set of propositions. Punishment is due in the first place because of sin, hardness of heart, moral depravity, total rebellion against God, total selfishness. Because of all these things and more God would be just if He made no provision for salvation and just condemned everyone as everyone is guilty and deserves condemnation. But He loves the world and so through the sacrifice of His Son He provided a solution, a way out. If you refuse to accept the gift of forgiveness you remain guilty of the sins for which Christ died and you are punished for them, not for a mental decision regarding a proposition.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you know why you believe this?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think so, at least as much as I know anything about why I believe what I believe.


[ QUOTE ]
Would you be willing to have an open mind, research, ask questions,and research some more?

[/ QUOTE ]
I have an open mind but no I'm not willing to spend my whole life researching christianity. I'm more than happy to debate it here as long as you also have an open mind and don't start from the assumption the bible is true.


[ QUOTE ]
I also believe if people truly seek Him with an open mind, and with all their heart, they will find Him.

[/ QUOTE ]
I may be judging this too harshy but it just sounds like a hard sell argument where if people don't end up agreeing with your view then you say they didn't try hard enough or truly enough.

chez

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

condemning people for not believing is extremely unjust.


[/ QUOTE ]

You keep saying this. But I keep pointing out that God is not punishing anyone because they don't believe a set of propositions. Punishment is due in the first place because of sin, hardness of heart, moral depravity, total rebellion against God, total selfishness. Because of all these things and more God would be just if He made no provision for salvation and just condemned everyone as everyone is guilty and deserves condemnation. But He loves the world and so through the sacrifice of His Son He provided a solution, a way out. If you refuse to accept the gift of forgiveness you remain guilty of the sins for which Christ died and you are punished for them, not for a mental decision regarding a proposition.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its the same thing. If I don't believe then I can't accept the gift of forgivness and I get infinite punishment for sins I can't begin to comprehend.

My sense of right and wrong still finds this monstrous and that cannot be the way a good god would be.

[Edit: If I've misunderstood you and can avoid condemnation witout believing then please clear that up as we may then not be disagreeing about anything]

chez

[Jeff V]

chez-
I understand your comments. But aren't you starting from the assumption that The Bible is untrue? If not I'm sorry for inferring that you were.

I'm also not talking about spending your whole life researching christianity. It is only fair to get facts then draw a conclusion.

Your final point- I guess we could go round and round about that one. I am only stating my beliefs, not trying to make a hard sell.

I Wish I Could Do Those Quote Boxes,
Jeff

i was thinking about -chrisnice's-, statement about God being by deffinition the absolute authority on everything, and I confronted the possibility that my initial statement about how being gay or having premarrital sex doesn't weigh as heavily on the sin meter with me as say murder, may just be because of the times that i live in and perhaps that this God is the one to straighten out the truth about what's right and wrong .

a person living now would most deffinitely abhor a murderer more than say a gay person(at least MOST people would), but during a different time it may not be that way at all, so i can accept that God may be right over me on every subject...

that said though, i still find it rediculous to expect me to wade through all the different moral standings without evidence of God's existence, and be expected to come to the right conclusions and live my life by it before i die.

again touching on chez's argument, i also don't think that people can be blamed for not believing in God or for having different moral beliefs as Him, even realizing themselves that it may just be a product of the times that they live in. furthermore i find it rediculous that God would then punish me for not abiding by his laws while i was on earth, when considering all of those factors

so in conclusion, i am willing to admit that if there is a God than He would most likely be right about all moral issues and that mine are probably just an adaptation of the times that i live in (although for my time on earth i'll still not be against gay marriages or fornication or many other things that the bible says is wrong), but i would still be uneasy about this God being so unforgiving as to punish someone for not believing in Him during their lifetime.

i'd like to add a special thanks to -chrisnice- for opening me up to some new possibilities with his agruments, and thank you chez for arguing our side(at least generally our side) while i was sleeping /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Its the same thing. If I don't believe then I can't accept the gift of forgivness and I get infinite punishment for sins I can't begin to comprehend.


[/ QUOTE ]


Mankind is in a bad spot. He's guilty and thinks he's innocent. He deceives himself and convinces himself he's honest. He uses his own standard as an absolute to judge God even though he knows he's finite.

God is gracious and full of compassion. He is light and He gives light. He is the only hope for us.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I Wish I Could Do Those Quote Boxes,


[/ QUOTE ]

They look like this:

[ quote ] [ /quote ]

but with no spaces between the bracket and quote. Put the quoted material in between them. A shortcut is below where you type the reply - just click on Quote and it will give you the two codes.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Mankind is in a bad spot. He's guilty and thinks he's innocent. He deceives himself and convinces himself he's honest. He uses his own standard as an absolute to judge God even though he knows he's finite.

[/ QUOTE ]
It doesn't help your case very much. If mankind is in a bad spot then its not my fault and I can only judge as a finite being.

[ QUOTE ]
God is gracious and full of compassion. He is light and He gives light. He is the only hope for us.

[/ QUOTE ]
If so then he isn't going to condemn me because I don't believe in him/can't accept his gift of forgiveness. Nor will he condemn me because mankind is in a bad spot or because i am only a finite being.

chez

[Jeff V]

[ QUOTE ]
but with no spaces between the bracket and quote. Put the quoted material in between them. A shortcut is below where you type the reply - just click on Quote and it will give you the two codes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks,
Jeff

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I Wish I Could Do Those Quote Boxes,

[/ QUOTE ]
select quote from the Instant UBB code box and stick what you want quoted in the middle.

[ QUOTE ]
I understand your comments. But aren't you starting from the assumption that The Bible is untrue? If not I'm sorry for inferring that you were.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe the bible is true but that doesn't mean it isn't. If we are debating the truth of the bible then I don't start from he assumption that its false and can't argue with anyone that starts from the assumption its true.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm also not talking about spending your whole life researching christianity. It is only fair to get facts then draw a conclusion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. As I said I'm willing to spend more time debating it here if you wish. If we are being open-minded then we start from a position of no belief so tell me why you conclude that the bible is true and I'll be convinced or tell you why I'm not.


chez

[David Sklansky]

"When you reject the free offer of justification, forgiveness of sins, there remains no more sacrifice."

Are you really so dense as to truly believe that no one "rejects" this "offer" simply because they truly do not think it ever occurred?

[David Sklansky]

"I believe no one is punished who doesn't deserve it and no one is forgiven who does deserve it."

Then you DON'T believe in predestination in the way spaminator or udon'tknowmickey do (both of whom say that who is chosen to be saved has nothing to do with the deservedness of the person) and DO believe in predestination only in the sense that BluffTHIS mentions. Admit it. It will make you feel better.

[David Sklansky]

"You keep saying this. But I keep pointing out that God is not punishing anyone because they don't believe a set of propositions. Punishment is due in the first place because of sin, hardness of heart, moral depravity, total rebellion against God, total selfishness. Because of all these things and more God would be just if He made no provision for salvation and just condemned everyone as everyone is guilty and deserves condemnation. But He loves the world and so through the sacrifice of His Son He provided a solution, a way out. If you refuse to accept the gift of forgiveness you remain guilty of the sins for which Christ died and you are punished for them, not for a mental decision regarding a proposition."

But even granting this, eternal torture is a punishment that doesn't fit the crime.

Which brings me to this question. Can you accept the possibility that God would lie to us for our own good? Is it blasphemous in your mind, to hold out hope that hell isn't always as bad as he says and that he will make exceptions in cases not mentioned in the bible?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Are you really so dense as to truly believe that no one "rejects" this "offer" simply because they truly do not think it ever occurred?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Admit it. It will make you feel better


[/ QUOTE ]

If you ever return to logic and actually make a case about something I will consider admitting it.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Is it blasphemous in your mind, to hold out hope that hell isn't always as bad as he says and that he will make exceptions in cases not mentioned in the bible?


[/ QUOTE ]

How bad does the Bible say it is?

[Piers]

[ QUOTE ]
you, if faced with meeting God and Him turning out to actually be the one of the christian faith, how many of you would be actually choose to give the perverbial "up yours" to your creator?

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually try to be polite to new acquaintances.

[David Sklansky]

"Are you really so dense as to truly believe that no one "rejects" this "offer" simply because they truly do not think it ever occurred?"

"Yes."

Thus all rabbis are liars.

[ QUOTE ]
i have been reading the posts in this forum for a few nights now and noticed how many "generally non-believers" there were, so i was wonderring how many of you, if faced with meeting God and Him turning out to actually be the one of the christian faith, how many of you would be actually choose to give the perverbial "up yours" to your creator?

i do realize that this is somewhat strange to tell your creator "what's what", but i really can't see wavering on my opinions, even for the great one

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if this has been addressed, but to do this you would have to be dumber than dirt. I mean anyone with half a brain should be able to see how completely irrational this is. This works both way. If a Christian died, saw Muslims running around in Paradise with multiple women each, and then decided Muslims were still wrong...get a clue.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Thus all rabbis are liars.


[/ QUOTE ]

Error and deceit are distinguishable.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i have been reading the posts in this forum for a few nights now and noticed how many "generally non-believers" there were, so i was wonderring how many of you, if faced with meeting God and Him turning out to actually be the one of the christian faith, how many of you would be actually choose to give the perverbial "up yours" to your creator?

i do realize that this is somewhat strange to tell your creator "what's what", but i really can't see wavering on my opinions, even for the great one

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if this has been addressed, but to do this you would have to be dumber than dirt. I mean anyone with half a brain should be able to see how completely irrational this is. This works both way. If a Christian died, saw Muslims running around in Paradise with multiple women each, and then decided Muslims were still wrong...get a clue.

[/ QUOTE ]

first read my last post before "special thanks"

secondly, i don't mean still not believing that the religion is the right one, i mean still disagreeing with the moral code in the religion...(i've also retracted this argument and given reasons for the retraction in my last post before "special thanks")

[siegfriedandroy]

[ QUOTE ]
i then told him that if i meet this God when i die and He is exactly like the christian faith depicts him and has the same views on what's right and wrong, i would choose to reject this God because of the way He felt on certain subjects (this was spawned out of a gay rights argument), such as gay rights.

[/ QUOTE ]


this is absurd. God turns out to exist after all. This means His decrees are absolutely good, just and all-wise. If he says homosexuality is wrong, then it IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG. Yet you would be so adamant in your INCORRECT belief that you would shun God b/c of it? (In addition, your atheistic position on the morality of homosexuality is without meaning and is of zero import...as Sklansky can quickly attest to, there is no such thing as genuine 'right' or 'wrong' for an atheist. Your adamant stance on homosexuality is blatantly inconsistent with a true atheistic position (which should state that right/wrong is a meaningless question to begin with)
__________________________________________________ __________
Atheists often claim that if presented with irrefutable evidence, they would believe and worship Christ. Judging by foolish statements like your own (and also another poster, hurlyburly, in another thread), im not so sure I agree. It seems that, just as the Bible states, that many would still reject Him.

[David Sklansky]

"Thus all rabbis are liars."

"Error and deceit are distinguishable."

But you claimed that in the case of anyone who "rejects" God's offer of forgiveness via Jesus, it can never be because they truly believed that the offer wasn't made. Thus rabbis who use this "excuse" (which is essentially all of them) are lying.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Thus rabbis who use this "excuse" (which is essentially all of them) are lying.


[/ QUOTE ]

Motive gets complicated. My own motives are often foggy to me so I can't begin to sift the motives of others. Rejecting Jesus is unbelief. It may entail lying as Romans 1 talks about suppressing the truth. But I don't think they are necessarily telling a conscious untruth when they deny that Jesus is the Messiah. They probably really believe He isn't. But they are still not sincere because they really believe it for the wrong reasons which they ought to know better. In that sense everyone who rejects the Gospel is lying at some point in the motivation chain. I just wouldn't label the statement made by a Rabbi technically as a lie but as a culpable error.

[David Sklansky]

"But I don't think they are necessarily telling a conscious untruth when they deny that Jesus is the Messiah. They probably really believe He isn't. But they are still not sincere"

I'm handing you off to BluffTHIS at this point.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm handing you off to BluffTHIS at this point.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought you didn't believe in hell.

[ QUOTE ]
first read my last post before "special thanks"

secondly, i don't mean still not believing that the religion is the right one, i mean still disagreeing with the moral code in the religion...(i've also retracted this argument and given reasons for the retraction in my last post before "special thanks")

[/ QUOTE ]
This thread is long, and I don't read every post in many threads.

Am I to understand if you died, met God, He is the all knowing being some Christians have said He is, and His views on morailty are always right, you will say something like, "Yes, you exist as Christians claimed, I will disagree that your views are incorrect (maybe b/c, as you said, your feeling on gay rights). I will choose to reject You and go to Hell, which I know I will be my worst nightmore 1000 fold, than living in Heaven which will be good."?

What's you opinion of a Christian who see Muslims in Paradise, and decided that Koran teachings are still not for Him, so he'll reject God & Paradise, b/c of whatever reason (his upbringing, the way he feels, a particular issue, etc)?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
this is absurd. God turns out to exist after all. This means His decrees are absolutely good,

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? just sounds like your opinion.

chez

[RxForMoreCowbell]

That something is all powerful in no way means it is more likely to be moral. In fact, on earth we say quite the opposite, the more powerful the more likely to be corrupt.

[ QUOTE ]
That something is all powerful in no way means it is more likely to be moral. In fact, on earth we say quite the opposite, the more powerful the more likely to be corrupt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ants = weak
Humans = all-powerful (to ants)

Thus, humans are more moral.

Yup, that seems like a nice heaping of logic.

/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Ants = weak
Humans = all-powerful (to ants)


[/ QUOTE ]


Stronger humans = all-powerful to weaker humans.
Strongest human = king of the world.

It's called might makes right.

But with God, though He is all powerful, He is also all good, all just, all righteous and all loving.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
But with God, though He is all powerful, He is also all good, all just, all righteous and all loving.

[/ QUOTE ]


You seemed to have given up trying to justify the truth of this. Is it just faith?

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

You seemed to have given up trying to justify the truth of this. Is it just faith?


[/ QUOTE ]

I've never tried to use the theistic proofs in an absolute sense. One thing I do is show how all non-Christian worldviews are ultimately irrational. It is only if the God of the Bible exists that human reason has any meaning. I can't prove meaning, it's an assumption. Perhaps God doesn't exist. In which case, nothing has meaning. Might doesn't make right, might just is, and is unintelligible.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing I do is show how all non-Christian worldviews are ultimately irrational.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you mean that you show they fail to explain everything, or that they rest on irrational beliefs?

chez

first i would like to point out that although i say i would gladly take hell over heaven because of conflicting beliefs with God, i only mean in moral theory right now, but in that situation, if given the chance to go to heaven(which i wouldn't be given) i would choose to obey and worship the christian God because I am a weak person and fear would most deffinitely overcome any beliefs i held...this would probably be the case with nearly all (including chez) who feel similarly about how unjust a christian God is.

as far as the christian seeing Muslin Paradise is concerned, there are some strong willed christians who would not want to be part of the Muslim paradise because they disagree with the Muslims on certain issues.(although i pointed out how any moral fellings can be tossed out as a product of the times or your upbringing, and therefor you would be a fool to still reject the Muslim paradise)


If someone has a problem with the way that God judges people and they think that He is unjust in rejecting people who don't believe in Him, then this is another issue. this argument is not an effect of the traditional morals of a time that someone lives in(although there are probably arguments that it is), but this question(as argued by chez in this thread) is one that even God may not be able to shake from some people. this is the primary reason that some people would(at least in their minds) choose not to be a part of the kingdom of heaven.

[ QUOTE ]


But with God, though He is all powerful, He is also all good, all just, all righteous and all loving.

[/ QUOTE ]

by giving anything free will you are essentially giving up any distinction between what is right and wrong, even with yourself. since there are now "opinions" floating around, there is no set or morals that are RIGHT.

anything with free will to create and adapt new ideas and opinions is now on an even playing field with all free willed creatures and even God himself.

--if there is a God, which i don't believe there is, and if it is the christian God, whch i don't believe it is, then giving humans free will was the biggest mistake he ever made

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a weak person and fear would most deffinitely overcome any beliefs i held...this would probably be the case with nearly all (including chez) who feel similarly about how unjust a christian God is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm definitely a coward but as discussed before if god offered me the option of heaven when I'm dead then it can't be the case that belief when alive is neccessary to go to heaven.

So I have to image some other scenario. suppose I die and god says I can come in provided I believe he is good but only because I'm not lefthanded (or some other arbitrary atribute).

Then I may say I believe (being a coward) but don't think I have the option of actually believing. Can god scare me into believing in his goodness? I also have to consider the strong possibility that such a god is evil and that I will be better off rejecting him. (he may also be bluffing as some sort of test).

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Do you mean that you show they fail to explain everything, or that they rest on irrational beliefs?


[/ QUOTE ]

Their fundamental principle is irrational which is either chance or impersonal law, which are basically the same thing.

by choosing to believe because i'm weak and would fear hell too much, i only mean that i would try my hardest to fake it. I don't think i would be able to overcome my true feelings about this God

...so if this God is all-knowing...well then I'm screwed /images/graemlins/frown.gif

curiously this is the same reason that when christians ask athiests why not just believe the christian faith since they "have nothing to lose by believing", they don't seem to get that this would be an arbitrary attemp for most non-believers...and furthermore this is another reason why God rejecting those who don't believe is rediculous

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Do you mean that you show they fail to explain everything, or that they rest on irrational beliefs?


[/ QUOTE ]

Their fundamental principle is irrational which is either chance or impersonal law, which are basically the same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

and what do you mean by irrational?

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

curiously this is the same reason that when christians ask athiests why not just believe the christian faith since they "have nothing to lose by believing"


[/ QUOTE ]

I strongly disagree with this approach. There's nothing in the Bible that supports this idea. It basically asks someone to believe what they don't believe.

[ QUOTE ]

.and furthermore this is another reason why God rejecting those who don't believe is rediculous


[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't the reason He judges unbelievers. He supplies ample evidence of His existence and nature. The Bible says you are without excuse. There are good reasons to believe, to trust in God. But faith is required, He doesn't force you.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
by choosing to believe because i'm weak and would fear hell too much, i only mean that i would try my hardest to fake it. I don't think i would be able to overcome my true feelings about this God

...so if this God is all-knowing...well then I'm screwed /images/graemlins/frown.gif

curiously this is the same reason that when christians ask athiests why not just believe the christian faith since they "have nothing to lose by believing", they don't seem to get that this would be an arbitrary attemp for most non-believers...and furthermore this is another reason why God rejecting those who don't believe is rediculous

[/ QUOTE ]

We just have to hope that if there is a god that he is a good god and not the god of most religous belief.

The most sensible form of any Pascals wager type arguments is to trust your moral feelings because if there is a good god then these will be an honest guide.

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

and what do you mean by irrational?


[/ QUOTE ]

1a. Not endowed with reason. c. Marked by a lack of accord with reason or sound judgment: an irrational dislike.

To anticipate your next move, I can't prove the God of the Bible through any process of human reason, at least not in an ultimate, absolute sense. We are finite. We must have some fundamental presupposition on which all our reasoning is based. Only omnipotence can prove absolutely. We accept that the universe has meaning and the only way it can is if God exists. We also believe that He is ultimate reason. Because of this we don't think Christianity is irrational, but the full justification for it is beyond our ability to reason, or our ability to show empirically with objective certainty. On the other hand, non-Christian systems all assume the ultimacy of chance and are thus irrational internally.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
This isn't the reason He judges unbelievers. He supplies ample evidence of His existence and nature. The Bible says you are without excuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

but we have already demonstrated that the god of the bible is deceitful or not good so even if the bible is the word of god, it is not to be trusted when its says 'you are without excuse'.

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

We just have to hope that if there is a god that he is a good god and not the god of most religous belief.


[/ QUOTE ]

Does it make sense to you that if God is good He would communicate with us? If so, then I submit that the Bible, when understood as fully as possible for us, is by far the most convincing of all documents that make any claim to being God's word.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

but we have already demonstrated that the god of the bible is deceitful or not good


[/ QUOTE ]

I missed that part.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

We just have to hope that if there is a god that he is a good god and not the god of most religous belief.


[/ QUOTE ]

Does it make sense to you that if God is good He would communicate with us? If so, then I submit that the Bible, when understood as fully as possible for us, is by far the most convincing of all documents that make any claim to being God's word.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't make sense that he would condemn those who don't believe that.

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

It doesn't make sense that he would condemn those who don't believe that.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not believing that isn't the reason for condemnation.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

but we have already demonstrated that the god of the bible is deceitful or not good


[/ QUOTE ]

I missed that part.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its in this thread. It's very simple, either my moral sense deceives me or a good god cannot condemn those who never accept his gift of forgiveness because they don't believe.

chez

[ QUOTE ]
I strongly disagree with this approach. There's nothing in the Bible that supports this idea. It basically asks someone to believe what they don't believe.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's never been advice that was intended to make me want to start fake believeing..i think it's just intended to make athiests feel stupid for choosing not to believe.

[ QUOTE ]
This isn't the reason He judges unbelievers. He supplies ample evidence of His existence and nature. The Bible says you are without excuse. There are good reasons to believe, to trust in God. But faith is required, He doesn't force you.

[/ QUOTE ]

you say that there is ample evidence, but there are many people who this evidence and decide that there is much more and stronger evidence against a God existing.

it is the same situation if jurors see the same evidence and make different decisions. it's not necessarily because one of them has not considered the evidence, but that they interpret it differently or see some as stronger and come to different decisions. should these people who make the wrong decision on a person's guilt or innocence be found at fault? this is what God does when he judges based on if a person accepts Christ or believes in him.

--I am not at the point to make any deffinite decisions because i have not yet considered all of the evidence(i am still very young at 18), but i have come to what i believe to be a reasonable conclusion that turned me towards non-believer.--

[hurlyburly]

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:

curiously this is the same reason that when christians ask athiests why not just believe the christian faith since they "have nothing to lose by believing"




I strongly disagree with this approach. There's nothing in the Bible that supports this idea. It basically asks someone to believe what they don't believe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd even go a step further and say that the suggester probably doesn't have much of a shot at heaven there either.

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:

.and furthermore this is another reason why God rejecting those who don't believe is rediculous



This isn't the reason He judges unbelievers. He supplies ample evidence of His existence and nature. The Bible says you are without excuse. There are good reasons to believe, to trust in God. But faith is required, He doesn't force you.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's nice of him not to force us. I guess the parts about eternal damnation must have slipped past the proofreaders...

[Trantor]

You are crazy. If you meet God then you have to admit He is real and you go along with it. How can you meet Him and still deny Him? Anyways there is no problem. If you die as a non-believer you go to hell even if you realise your mistake. But that won't trouble you as that is where you say you want to go anyway....enjoy!

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
You are crazy. If you meet God then you have to admit He is real and you go along with it. How can you meet Him and still deny Him? Anyways there is no problem. If you die as a non-believer you go to hell even if you realise your mistake. But that won't trouble you as that is where you say you want to go anyway....enjoy!

[/ QUOTE ]

or you could read the thread before responding. Thankyou.

chez

[Trantor]

I'll say what i want when I want. Please respect my right to do so. Thank you.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll say what i want when I want. Please respect my right to do so. Thank you.

[/ QUOTE ]

enjoy!

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

because they don't believe.


[/ QUOTE ]

I already answered that. Also, how do you define good? If God is absolute and good, then He defines it. You may reject Him but that doesn't mean you are right.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

because they don't believe.


[/ QUOTE ]

I already answered that.

[/ QUOTE ]

No you pointed out that it wasn't directly because I don't believe. My understanding of your view is that I cannot escape punishment without believing - am I misrepresenting you?

chez

[Trantor]

Just to say I _do_ know where you were coming from. At least a sentence in reply is a bit better than all these "ditto" or "quote" replies (imho!).

Now to read your earlier posts!

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

you say that there is ample evidence, but there are many people who this evidence and decide that there is much more and stronger evidence against a God existing.


[/ QUOTE ]

Evidence is always evaluated in terms of a belief system. God says in the Bible that there is plenty of evidence of His existence. See Romans chapter 1. It says the evidence is sufficient to leave you without excuse.

[ QUOTE ]

I am not at the point to make any deffinite decisions because i have not yet considered all of the evidence(i am still very young at 18), but i have come to what i believe to be a reasonable conclusion that turned me towards non-believer.--


[/ QUOTE ]

Evidence alone is insuffient because of what I said above. You have a belief system and will fit the evidence into that system. Many people saw the miracles of Jesus but did not believe He was God or the Messiah. Israel spent 40 years in the wilderness where they saw miracles virtually every day but many still turned to idols.

If you truly want to know the truth God promises that He will reveal it to you. Keep your mind as open as possible. Try to understand what Christianity and the Bible are really saying, not just what this or that person says they say. See if what the Bible says about man and his nature squares with reality. The Bible is unique in many ways and gives information about us and God as well as reality in general that is found no where else.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

That's nice of him not to force us. I guess the parts about eternal damnation must have slipped past the proofreaders..


[/ QUOTE ]

He doesn't force you to believe.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Just to say I _do_ know where you were coming from. At least a sentence in reply is a bit better than all these "ditto" or "quote" replies (imho!).

Now to read your earlier posts!

[/ QUOTE ]

No worries. Sorry for being abrupt.

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

My understanding of your view is that I cannot escape punishment without believing - am I misrepresenting you?


[/ QUOTE ]

You could say as a practical matter that the reason someone is condemned is because they don't believe. But the legal ground of condemnation is guilt. If a criminal is convicted of murder and the judge offers him a pardon if he will repent and the criminal doesn't repent, the cause in fact might be his refusal, but the legal ground is guilt.

This is more than hair splitting because you are setting up a straw man when you try to depict God as someone who is condemning people because they don't believe. The Bible repeats over and over that the cause of judgment is sin. God offers forgiveness for that sin. When you refuse to accept the forgiveness the original sentence is carried out.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

My understanding of your view is that I cannot escape punishment without believing - am I misrepresenting you?


[/ QUOTE ]

You could say as a practical matter that the reason someone is condemned is because they don't believe. But the legal ground of condemnation is guilt. If a criminal is convicted of murder and the judge offers him a pardon if he will repent and the criminal doesn't repent, the cause in fact might be his refusal, but the legal ground is guilt.

This is more than hair splitting because you are setting up a straw man when you try to depict God as someone who is condemning people because they don't believe. The Bible repeats over and over that the cause of judgment is sin. God offers forgiveness for that sin. When you refuse to accept the forgiveness the original sentence is carried out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever sins we are all guilty of, those who believe can get redemption and those who don't believe have no chance of redemption.

In your view is that true?

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

In your view is that true?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

In your view is that true?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

My moral sense tells me that any being who enforces that view is morally repugnant.

So either I am being deceived by my feelings of right and wrong or the enforcer isn't good.

chez

[ QUOTE ]
You are crazy. If you meet God then you have to admit He is real and you go along with it. How can you meet Him and still deny Him? Anyways there is no problem. If you die as a non-believer you go to hell even if you realise your mistake. But that won't trouble you as that is where you say you want to go anyway....enjoy!

[/ QUOTE ]

i hope you do read the whole argument before insulting me with a sarcastic -enjoy!-

-other posts do clarify what you are talking about so although it's long please read the whole thread before replying

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are crazy. If you meet God then you have to admit He is real and you go along with it. How can you meet Him and still deny Him? Anyways there is no problem. If you die as a non-believer you go to hell even if you realise your mistake. But that won't trouble you as that is where you say you want to go anyway....enjoy!

[/ QUOTE ]

i hope you do read the whole argument before insulting me with a sarcastic -enjoy!-

-other posts do clarify what you are talking about so although it's long please read the whole thread before replying

[/ QUOTE ]

oh i see you have decided to read it, thank you

[hurlyburly]

Door A: Sunny field full of bunnies
Door B: Slide leading to an infinite pool of broken glass and razorblades

Feel free to choose wisely!

If He wanted to give us freedom, why didn't He just say "I'm the only choice, it's me or unending blackness"? Hell didn't need to be a horrible place full of torturing fire. It just helped.

that's funny, last night a kid on my floor at college came in, noticed i was having a free will discussion and offered me the same strange "two doors" analogy and asked if i actually had to free will to make a choice because he already knew which door i'd choose...

anyway he had used a turkey sandwich behind one door and flesh eating dogs behind the other.

---i still don't quite understand this analogy and what it has to do with anything at all. i think that you still have a choice, a pretty lame deal, but a choice nonetheless

[hurlyburly]

Yeah, it is a lame choice. And no it doesn't really have anything to do with anything at all, unless you believe the choice is real. But for centuries, that's all it took.

Isn't "flesh-eating dogs" a redundancy? They could be weiner-dogs.

[ QUOTE ]


Isn't "flesh-eating dogs" a redundancy? They could be weiner-dogs.

[/ QUOTE ]

true, or it could just be a turkey sandwich vs. a bologna sandwich...just as clear a choice /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
Door A: Sunny field full of bunnies
Door B: Slide leading to an infinite pool of broken glass and razorblades

Feel free to choose wisely!

If He wanted to give us freedom, why didn't He just say "I'm the only choice, it's me or unending blackness"? Hell didn't need to be a horrible place full of torturing fire. It just helped.

[/ QUOTE ]

The irony - some don't choose door A.

Flaming Hot Thread Award

I'd like to thank evereyone who made this thread(my first)the best it could be...this award goes to you!! especially to my Dell computer...specifically the Dell customer support team comprised of Indians that know much more about computers than me, but will never let the people they talk to know it because they can't understand a word they say.

And I'd like to thank Mike Caro for grossly overstating the average profit from tells...the prospect of making more money than Michael Jordan by spotting each time an opponent looks at his chips is what turned me to the poker lifestyle

--lastly I'd like to thank David Sklansky...that story in TOP about that guy who lost with a royal flush because he didn't declare openers gave me quite a chuckle.

(by the way if you cry while you read this it will add to the effect)

[RJT]

Just to clarify things from a few posts back, for the sake of the discussion:

1) The Bible can be taken to be completely the True Word of God.
2) The Bible can be taken to be completely the True Word of God, but not always interpreted correctly.
3) The Bible can be taken to be the imperfect transcription by man of what God intended as His True Word.
4) The Bible can be taken to be the imperfect transcription by man of what God intended as His True Word,, and compiled with that it might not always be interpreted correctly. (This one too but that we still get it right in spite of the errors in transcription).

Or of course, take bits and pieces or not taken at all.

[David Sklansky]

"He supplies ample evidence of His existence and nature."

If by "His" you mean the Christian God, the fact remains that far more than half of those who have studied the subject almost as much as you, and can beat you on any generally accepted intelligence test, do not agree with your above statement. Given that, the only explanation is some sort of psychological blindness or problem on their part. But why should they be more likely to have that problem than you?

[David Sklansky]

"Israel spent 40 years in the wilderness where they saw miracles virtually every day but many still turned to idols."

That would be a slam dunk argument that people are bad at evaluating evidence. Except for one little thing.


ONLY MORONS OR LUNATICS THINK THAT EVER HAPPENNED.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Given that, the only explanation is some sort of psychological blindness or problem on their part.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's called sin.

[ QUOTE ]

But why should they be more likely to have that problem than you?


[/ QUOTE ]

It's everyone's problem.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

ONLY MORONS OR LUNATICS THINK THAT EVER HAPPENNED.


[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't really worth the effort anymore.

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

ONLY MORONS OR LUNATICS THINK THAT EVER HAPPENNED.


[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't really worth the effort anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

Frankly, I'm surprised you stuck with it this long.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Frankly, I'm surprised you stuck with it this long.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like to give up until they do because until then there's always hope. Also, I learn much myself if a civil dialogue is maintained.

[David Sklansky]

"ONLY MORONS OR LUNATICS THINK THAT EVER HAPPENNED."

"This isn't really worth the effort anymore."

Oh stop being so sensitive. I was talking about bossjj and BluffTHIS. (Still you should realize it is totally wrong to to try to make a point with the use of examples that most people won't stipulate are true)

[siegfriedandroy]

Mr. Sklansky - where do you get your statistics from?

How do you know exactly what % of high iq'ers (let's say those over 150) believe in a God? Even if you knew this absolutely, what does it prove? Maybe there are thousands of potential high iq'ers living in some african jungle whose intellectual gifts haven't been nurtured sufficiently to realize this potential. maybe they would all be Christians or Muslims, etc. if they looked at the evidence. i dont know what im getting at, i just think your appeals to the high iq crowd do not really help with determining absolute truth. should the most 'educated' scientist in the world really be that much more proficient in determining whether the Christian God exists than a 10 year old kid? I dont know that knowledge of physics truly equates with deep philosophical accuracy in terms of knowledge of reality. fwiw, i think i respect your atheistic thinking far more than many on this forum. i despise the way many of think (not that i actually like the way you think!); inconsistency after inconsistency, just horrible.

anyway, what is your iq, sir!?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Oh stop being so sensitive.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really care about being insulted per se(Ok, I care but I try to get past it). But I don't like wasting my time with anyone who does so because I take it to mean they no longer want to engage in discussion.

[ QUOTE ]

(Still you should realize it is totally wrong to to try to make a point with the use of examples that most people won't stipulate are true)


[/ QUOTE ]

Not totally wrong for a couple of reasons. The Bible cite illustrates what I believe will be the case much of the time. It isn't offered as a proof but as a statement concerning the impact of miracles. You don't have to accept the factuality of the miracles to understand the point which can then be debated. Second, I can point to several posts, including some of yours, that make the same point - i.e., if a miracle occurred we would just have to wait until science found the explanation.

I'm not trying to downplay the importance of miracles, just pointing out that not everyone responds to them in the same way. The Bible says we have enough evidence without miracles to be held accountable. The miracles add to the seriousness of unbelief and strengthen the faith of believers.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really care about being insulted per se(Ok, I care but I try to get past it). But I don't like wasting my time with anyone who does so because I take it to mean they no longer want to engage in discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always try to remain civil, are we continuing our bit of the thread? I also wanted to go into why you think my worldview is irrational but want to finish this first.

chez

[Timer]

[ QUOTE ]
"He supplies ample evidence of His existence and nature."

If by "His" you mean the Christian God, the fact remains that far more than half of those who have studied the subject almost as much as you, and can beat you on any generally accepted intelligence test, do not agree with your above statement...

[/ QUOTE ]

Show your work.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I always try to remain civil, are we continuing our bit of the thread? I also wanted to go into why you think my worldview is irrational but want to finish this first.


[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't respond because I had nothing to add after your last post.

If you deny an Absolute Personality as ultimate the only remaining choice is chance which makes irrationality the ultimate principle. Some claim that impersonal laws are ultimate but the concept is not really different from chance as there can be no purpose or reason in the impersonal.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I always try to remain civil, are we continuing our bit of the thread? I also wanted to go into why you think my worldview is irrational but want to finish this first.


[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't respond because I had nothing to add after your last post.


[/ QUOTE ]

I've started a new thread because this one is getting unwieldy. I'm still not sure whether (and why) you think the argument is flawed or not so please chip in.

chez