Originally posted by SuzianneThat's not a mental picture of an atheist. That's a mental picture of a theist. Haven't you heard? Atheists do not believe God exists in the first place.
This exemplifies the mental picture I always get of atheists: A man standing in a meadow, perhaps atop a small rise, shaking his fist at the sky and yelling, "You're not the boss of me!"
2 edits
To be honest, the idea that a perfectly loving, righteous, just, etc God would sentence persons to eternal torture for lack of belief in something seems just impossibly stupid. I don't know if you've noticed but it's 2013. You might want to step out of the dark ages, get with the times and start exercising your brain a bit. In this post we see good examples of numerous bizarro concepts, including bizarro-love, bizarro-fairness, bizarro-righteousness, bizarro-justice, etc, etc.
I think you may be looking at the matter of eternal misery in damnation from the wrong angle.
Suppose the truth within man's conscience finally catches up with him ? Suppose he has denied his sinfulness for his whole life against the conviction of his conscience, the word of God and the Holy Spirit. But then confronting the truth which he can no longer suppress his own conscience cries out within him for justice?
In that case hell is a final escape. The pain of being in the light of God is less than the crying out of the God created conscience that he be dealt with because of his transgressions.
In this case the rejector of God finally has a rendevous with his conscience of truth. What he has done is so awful that he himself hates himself. His own conscience cries out for punishment.
In this case the lost sinner need no wall or fence to confine him to hell. He would not dare step out of it into the light and love of the God he has spurned. And his own conscience in him has no argument but rather finds justice preferable to existing any longer in a total lie of God not being for him.
Now if such a state exists, wouldn't it be God's responsibility to disincentivize man from wanting to go there ?
Would it not be God's responsibility that this place totally absent of God is also totally absent from blessing of which God is the source ?
Then in terms which every human can grasp it could be conveyed that this place "free" from the Source of all happiness should be unpleasant and avoided. And His redemption has furnished a gracious way of avoiding that Godless eternity.
The simple language could be used to reach the most people, albeit perhaps metaphorical - a burning, a thirsting, a pain.
It could be that the pain of stepping out of hell into the light of the God of truth and love would be more unbearable for the rejector of Christ than to remain there under the conscience crying out for deserved punishment.
In the story Jesus told of the rich man who went into the flame in Luke 16, we see no desire in him to leave. We only see request for some momentary relief. And we see his plea that none of his loved ones still left alive on earth would come to be where he now is.
"And he said, Then I ask Father [Abraham] to send him [the beggar Lazarus] to the house of my father - For I have five brothers - so that he [Lazarus the beggar] may solemnly testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment."
His only possibility of comfort was in knowning that his remaining relatives could avoid coming to the same place of punishment.
And Abraham's reply - "But Abraham said, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
But he said, No, Father abraham; but ifg someone risen from the dead would go to them, they will repent.
But he said to him, If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead." (See Luke 16:19-31 for the full teaching)
Originally posted by LemonJelloUsing the year 2013 is not a good excuse.If God exists, and He does, then it is He who is the One who says what is right and fair, not us.
This whole defense rests squarely on a purely subjectivist view of fairness, morals, right action, etc. After all, this assumes that the truth values of fairness claims, moral claims, etc, are all constitutively dependent on the attitudes o ...[text shortened]... ncluding bizarro-love, bizarro-fairness, bizarro-righteousness, bizarro-justice, etc, etc.
Originally posted by RBHILLThat is clearly wrong. If God, or anyone else, can arbitrarily decide what is or is not fair, then the word looses its usual meaning and instead means something totally different. What is or is not fair by the standard meaning however cannot be decided by God.
If God exists, and He does, then it is He who is the One who says what is right and fair, not us.
Sorry, but you wont get away with playing the redefining game on this forum.
Originally posted by RBHILLIts somewhat irrelevant what the Bible was made for. The fact remains that you are wrong when you claim that God can decide what is or is not fair anymore than he can decide what is or is not true, or is or is not just, or is or is not morally correct.
??????????????
One thing though the Bible does say it was made for the simple.